# WHAT HAPPENED TO ROCKFORD FOSGATE



## cleansoundz

I have used their 2007-2009 and their older amplifier lines. And I can definitely tell the difference in the quality of their products. Does anyone know what happened to the quality of Rockford Fosgate?


----------



## BigRed

china


----------



## ChrisB

BigRed said:


> china


Wasn't 2006 or 2007 around the time frame when RF moved production of EVERYTHING overseas? IIRC, their 25 to Life series didn't work out as well as they thought it would and they ended up flooding the internet with unsold units for not much more than build cost.


----------



## cleansoundz

They moved overseas in 2008, Thailand to be exact. I am not saying that their quality is worse just very different, that's for sure. I know that in 2003, they had a lot of turnover in their engineering area. I can't put my finger on it.


----------



## 89grand

I had a chance to work for them back around 1999-2000, somewhere around that time as a SMT Process Engineer. Luckily they didn't pay **** and I didn't take the job since if I had of, I would have been laid off eventually anyway.


----------



## rexroadj

Personally I would take the new power series over the old.......Same power, better cooling, and much easier on the electrical system... thats just me though!


----------



## audiogodz1

The egg shell amps were the last good RF's. Late 90's. Of course if all you have had are the new amps you wouldn't know better so there's a lot of cheerleaders for the 2k+ RF.


----------



## rexroadj

Right????? same could be said of all the people that have only used the old and not given the new a chance! For the record I have owned more old school rocks than I can begin to recolect...They were awesome in there day and are still solid now, but that sure as hell does not take anything away from what they are producing now.... Personally I dont want an amp to make omlets on!


----------



## cleansoundz

What makes the new amps more efficient. The T1000-1BD has a fuse rating of 150A, T1500-1BD 200A, T400-4 100A, T600-4 150A and so forth. Whereas the Power BD1000a1 has a fuse rating of 100A, Power 400a4 50A, Punch 400a4 50A, Punch 400.4 50A, Punch 250.1 50A, Punch 250.2 50A, etc. Where is the efficiency in that? I have used the new Power series for 2 years and the T1500-1BD does get very warm whereas the Power BD1000a1 barely breaks a sweat after 1 1/2 of moderate use. At 2 ohms both of those amps are rated at 1000 watts. The T1500-1BD is 1 ohm stable whereas the BD1000a1 is not. Even the T1000-1BD with a fuse rating of 150A is not more efficient than the older BD1000a1. The difference in bass in minute. The difference in sound between the old and new is night and day.

This information comes from a person who has extensively used both versions.

Just playing Devils's advocate.


----------



## ACRucrazy

The last series of the RF amps I liked were these. Those that followed got worse every year IMO.
Still wish I kept my 800.2 600.4 500.2 etc of that series I had. I think i had a 300.1 also? Been many years.


----------



## rexroadj

I have had a COMPLETELY different experience... I will take your word for it regarding the fuse ratings...I dont really care...All I know is I can run 3 power series amps (t600.2) two of them 2ohm bridged and it doesnt get warm and my battery gauge isnt flopping around like crazy. I cant do that with the bd series (and get the same results) Personally I like the sound of the new T series then the older ones, but thats all preference. I will agree for a few years they threw out some junk on the market. But to bash the new ones just seems insane! There are a million threads going right now with people having a wicked time of getting over the old vs. new..... I have some amps that I just love the old ones.....kicker zr, ppi art, phoenix ms....etc.... But I would not say that those companys make crap compared to the old stuff? Just different, and catering to a wider and ever changing market....Here is what people seem to have the hardest thing wrapping there head around on this forum......We here are about %1 of the audio community. We have strict standards and are elite audiophiles (what ever the hell you want to call yourselfs) Companys are not going to be making things with the same goals as they used to. Its about smaller, cooler, more efficient, and affordable units.....Old school does not fit all these requirements.....The stuff made today is not really worse....Its just different. People just cant get past the logo and heatsink they are familiar with....Its amp prejudice or judging a book by its cover..... The new rockfords are just as good as the "old ones" there just different!


----------



## UNBROKEN

Does anyone really use RF for SQ systems ?
Read my sig...I'm running a bd6002, p6002, p4002 and a p3002 to power the speakers also listed with the DRZ9255 for processing.
Is there any reason I shouldn't move on to the Audison LRx series amps I've been looking at ?


----------



## jonnyanalog

Bill Pleasant from Team Hybrids uses the RF Power Series in his Altima. He has been very successful with that car. 
Unbroken ,you should keep them.


----------



## rexroadj

I went from an all mcintosh amp setup.....I used 3 t600.2's I loved them! Power and head room up the wazzuu! Are the equal to a mcintosh???? I dont know. Was I instantly a rockford fan? YES I owned several models of rockfords over the years and was never a fan per say..... Did they have balls? you bet your ass they did, will they last a lifetime? yup. I just didnt care for them in the sq arena...I found the new power series to be a step up in that dept. but its different for everyone. I am changing my system around again and might go back to them.... They just run effortlessly. But again despite my argumentative attitude, its all subjective..... I do think they have evolved overall as a company and thats my opinion! They did have some ugly bumps in the road but I think recovered extremely well!


----------



## spl152db

cleansoundz said:


> What makes the new amps more efficient. The T1000-1BD has a fuse rating of 150A, T1500-1BD 200A, T400-4 100A, T600-4 150A and so forth. Whereas the Power BD1000a1 has a fuse rating of 100A, Power 400a4 50A, Punch 400a4 50A, Punch 400.4 50A, Punch 250.1 50A, Punch 250.2 50A, etc. Where is the efficiency in that? I have used the new Power series for 2 years and the T1500-1BD does get very warm whereas the Power BD1000a1 barely breaks a sweat after 1 1/2 of moderate use. At 2 ohms both of those amps are rated at 1000 watts. The T1500-1BD is 1 ohm stable whereas the BD1000a1 is not. Even the T1000-1BD with a fuse rating of 150A is not more efficient than the older BD1000a1. The difference in bass in minute. The difference in sound between the old and new is night and day.
> 
> This information comes from a person who has extensively used both versions.
> 
> Just playing Devils's advocate.


and fuse ratings measure effeciency so effectively


----------



## cleansoundz

rexroadj said:


> I have had a COMPLETELY different experience... I will take your word for it regarding the fuse ratings...I dont really care...All I know is I can run 3 power series amps (t600.2) two of them 2ohm bridged and it doesnt get warm and my battery gauge isnt flopping around like crazy. I cant do that with the bd series (and get the same results) Personally I like the sound of the new T series then the older ones, but thats all preference. I will agree for a few years they threw out some junk on the market. But to bash the new ones just seems insane! There are a million threads going right now with people having a wicked time of getting over the old vs. new..... I have some amps that I just love the old ones.....kicker zr, ppi art, phoenix ms....etc.... But I would not say that those companys make crap compared to the old stuff? Just different, and catering to a wider and ever changing market....Here is what people seem to have the hardest thing wrapping there head around on this forum......We here are about %1 of the audio community. We have strict standards and are elite audiophiles (what ever the hell you want to call yourselfs) Companys are not going to be making things with the same goals as they used to. Its about smaller, cooler, more efficient, and affordable units.....Old school does not fit all these requirements.....The stuff made today is not really worse....Its just different. People just cant get past the logo and heatsink they are familiar with....Its amp prejudice or judging a book by its cover..... The new rockfords are just as good as the "old ones" there just different!


Agreed, I never said that the new RF is crap. I have said different as well. Even when you hold both amps you can feel a difference. My point is that i was just making an observation about the new stuff and what happened with them. That's all. I have owned the T600-2 and it did get hot and that was at 4 ohms bridged. I have used the T400-2 (with a 75% rating) and it did get hot at 4 ohms bridged. I have used the T400-4, T1000-1Bd, T1500-1BD and I still own the T500-1BD, 2 T400-4 and T1500-1BD and I will never sell them. But I own a punch 400.4, punch 200a4, 3 RF Power BD1000a1 amps, 3 RF Power 400a4, 2 Punch 150's, 2 Punch 45's, 1 Punch 75, 2 Punch 250.1 Power amps and 2 Punch 225.2 amps. BTW the only reason why I have so many of the older amps is because they were dirt cheap.

The new stuff sounds damn good but the older stuff well let's just say pure bliss. They are not as bulletproof as the old ones either because I had a T400-4 crap out on me after it got too hot.


----------



## cleansoundz

No I will never sell the newer stuff. I love the T series 200-2009 but I loveeeeeee the 1996-2000 era stuff even more.


----------



## kp89gt

rexroadj said:


> I have had a COMPLETELY different experience... I will take your word for it regarding the fuse ratings...I dont really care...All I know is I can run 3 power series amps (t600.2) two of them 2ohm bridged and it doesnt get warm and my battery gauge isnt flopping around like crazy. I cant do that with the bd series (and get the same results) Personally I like the sound of the new T series then the older ones, but thats all preference. I will agree for a few years they threw out some junk on the market. But to bash the new ones just seems insane! There are a million threads going right now with people having a wicked time of getting over the old vs. new..... I have some amps that I just love the old ones.....kicker zr, ppi art, phoenix ms....etc.... But I would not say that those companys make crap compared to the old stuff? Just different, and catering to a wider and ever changing market....Here is what people seem to have the hardest thing wrapping there head around on this forum......We here are about %1 of the audio community. We have strict standards and are elite audiophiles (what ever the hell you want to call yourselfs) Companys are not going to be making things with the same goals as they used to. Its about smaller, cooler, more efficient, and affordable units.....Old school does not fit all these requirements.....The stuff made today is not really worse....Its just different. People just cant get past the logo and heatsink they are familiar with....Its amp prejudice or judging a book by its cover..... The new rockfords are just as good as the "old ones" there just different!


Why the change then if it's only "different"? Different in which way? 

For the record, the last RF amp I owned was a Punch 150 back in the EARLY 90's. Not the HD, just the plain old Punch.


----------



## cleansoundz

Different as far as performance and in the mids and highs sound. The older amps give the vocals in my music more of a full sound. I feel the mid bass more.


----------



## rexroadj

I changed because I wanted to run two 4 channel amps for my front 3ways active, and a sub....I couldnt do that with the t600.2 I tried out the soundstream ref amps.....(they are awesome by the way) I find the overall sq better with the new ones..... just me? who cares! its what I think. I used a bunch of the old ones...... I can tell you this, I ran the old school punch on 8 8s and it was insane....I am pretty sure the amp was glowing but it was awesome! On a set of comps........No thanks.....In all fairness though I was always running some seriously high end gear back in the days though.


----------



## k-ink

To be fair, RF were never built and tested very well back in the old days anyway. I had a brand new 200ix that died within a week. The robotic construction method of the circuit boards (Surface Mount Technology) meant it had to be binned and replaced under warranty. Too bad if your buying used as a repair is impossible. Just like on most modern disposable amps. This is why I only ever buy hand made amps after that.


----------



## ChrisB

cleansoundz said:


> Different as far as performance and in the mids and highs sound. The older amps give the vocals in my music more of a full sound. I feel the mid bass more.


Certain old RF amps actually colored the sound and measured that way.










RF, Kicker, MTX, and Linear Power were all known to do something similar to the above at one point in time.


----------



## Redcloud

I used to run some of their older stuff and was always impressed with the performance of their amps. I had been out of the car audio scene for a good 8 years and had since heard Rockford stuff was crap.

Recently I ran across a dealer who was closing out their Rockford lines. All the Rockford product was marked down 50% from MSRP. I wasn't really happy with the sound I was getting out of my PDX amps, so I decided to go ahead and scoop up a t600-2 and hook it up to my hertz 3 way components. 

The difference in sound is night and day. I didn't tell my wife I had switched out amps. Later that day on the way to the movies she asked what I did to make the music sound better. I told her I got a new amp and she was upset that I didn't tell her about the purchase but happy that the sound was so much better. She has been telling me to get rid of the PDX for some time now lol. I am going to go back next weekend and get me another t600-2 to switch out the PDX1.600 next.

I don't know why there is so much hate. I would definitely give the new T series amps 2 thumbs up!


----------



## ryan s

ChrisB said:


> Certain old RF amps actually colored the sound and measured that way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RF, Kicker, MTX, and Linear Power were all known to do something similar to the above at one point in time.


No idea what that graph is supposed to show  There's 2 lines but 1 amp listed in the legend...

All I see is a shift of an eighth of a decibel...1/8...and 1/4 at the most. Is that even perceptible beyond test benches?


----------



## ChrisB

ryan s said:


> No idea what that graph is supposed to show  There's 2 lines but 1 amp listed in the legend...
> 
> All I see is a shift of an eighth of a decibel...1/8...and 1/4 at the most. Is that even perceptible beyond test benches?


That was from Car audio and Electronics bench test of the Rockford Fosgate amp. Basically, it does not accurately reproduce a flat signal. At 2 volts RMS of output, one can essentially expect an equal loudness contour. That could explain why the amplifiers "sound" different due to the fact that they intentionally color the sound via a "mistake". One more thing to consider.... How bad to you think that graph would be skewed at the maximum RMS output of 28.3 volts?

Also, this is the reason many shunned them for SQ competition purposes. Their output wasn't true to the input signal presented to it! As I stated, Rockford Fosgate wasn't the only one to do this back in the good old days. Kind of a shame how certain manufacturers added non-defeatable equal loudness contours to "set" their product apart.


----------



## ryan s

Now it seems we're going into "accurate" sound vs "good" sound...

I don't think I'll ever achieve "accurate" sound...at least not completely. It should sound darn "good" though :laugh:


----------



## chad

Dude, that's "the punch" man!


----------



## ChrisB

chad said:


> Dude, that's "the punch" man!


As I stated earlier, I believe MTX, Kicker, and Linear Power did something similar back in the day. Of course, now it is all making sense as to why these brands had a cult following.


----------



## ryan s

I have a Thunder...does that mean EssQue or DeeBeez?


----------



## cleansoundz

This forum is full of mature adults. Rather than bash people for their opinions, everyone either agrees or disagrees in a rational way and backs up their opinions with facts. I have learned quite a bit from this forum even from people with differing opinions. Please keep this information coming. 

Thank you for your feedback.


----------



## cleansoundz

ryan s said:


> Now it seems we're going into "accurate" sound vs "good" sound...
> 
> I don't think I'll ever achieve "accurate" sound...at least not completely. It should sound darn "good" though :laugh:


I don't think everyone in car audio will get 100% accurate sound either. Even people spending thousands of dollars on processors.


----------



## HondAudio

I personally feel they "jumped the shark" in 1997-1998 when they started marketing _everything_. 

Previously, their bread and butter was amps and subs. Two series: Punch and Power. All fine and good. Some time earlier they were putting out midranges, midbass, and tweeters. All fine and good... I guess you can miniaturize a sub and turn it into a midbass.

Then they started selling head units. IIRC, they were rebadged Denon units. OK...

Then, they started selling all manner of wiring, distribution blocks, batteries, and other miscellaneous and sundry installation accessories. It was a bad move. They lost focus on their core products: amps and subs.

...Just my opinion.


----------



## k-ink

They certainly didn't need any distraction. Even when they only had to make amps they didn't manage basic quality control properly.


----------



## ChrisB

I remember one of the Punch 150s that I was running in 1989 or 1990. It was professionally installed, and kept blowing fuses. Even though I was at 4 ohms stereo, Rockford Fosgate's response was to keep putting a bigger fuse. Well, the amplifier ended up burning itself up pretty bad, as in a mini fire. RF was good about it though because they replaced it under warranty.


----------



## 89grand

Actually Rockford was selling speakers for a very long time. At least back into the later 80's. In fact they bought the company that used to make them for them, Carbonneau.

They sold headunits long before the Denon ones. I believe they were made by Delco, or at least originally they were.


----------



## rockytophigh

rexroadj said:


> I changed because I wanted to run two 4 channel amps for my front 3ways active, and a sub....I couldnt do that with the t600.2 I tried out the soundstream ref amps.....(they are awesome by the way) I find the overall sq better with the new ones..... just me? who cares! its what I think. I used a bunch of the old ones...... I can tell you this, I ran the old school punch on 8 8s and it was insane....I am pretty sure the amp was glowing but it was awesome! On a set of comps........No thanks.....In all fairness though I was always running some seriously high end gear back in the days though.


Lemme see if I understand you right.......you went from McIntosh amps to the new Soundstream Reference amps to Rockford Fosgate? Jensen here we come? I'm just sayin' lol.


----------



## rexroadj

No I went from Mcintosh to Rockford to Soundstream....I still have some of all them.... Besides whats your point? I switched for power reasons to fit what ever I was running at the time and to try out new things.... I like to actually own something before I run my mouth about it. Unlike most. The only reason why I prefer the mcintosh over anything else I have used is because I have had some of them for 15yrs and never any issues at all. They were good "investments" as far as power, sound etc....I really like the new rockford amps, as well as the new soundstream reference amps... I look at them as steps sideways not up or down. The comparison to jenson is just ignorant. But you might as well join that club based on some of the people running there mouth on here and a few other threads..... These threads always end up useless pretty much overnight. Do you have anything of worth to add?


----------



## rockytophigh

rexroadj said:


> No I went from Mcintosh to Rockford to Soundstream....I still have some of all them.... Besides whats your point? I switched for power reasons to fit what ever I was running at the time and to try out new things.... I like to actually own something before I run my mouth about it. Unlike most. The only reason why I prefer the mcintosh over anything else I have used is because I have had some of them for 15yrs and never any issues at all. They were good "investments" as far as power, sound etc....I really like the new rockford amps, as well as the new soundstream reference amps... I look at them as steps sideways not up or down. The comparison to jenson is just ignorant. But you might as well join that club based on some of the people running there mouth on here and a few other threads..... These threads always end up useless pretty much overnight. Do you have anything of worth to add?


I have this of worth to add....head to the store and buy your ass a sense of freaking humore dude...pull them panties out of the bunch they're in. Geez, notice the lol or do you need a smiley to sense sarcasm with McIntosh, SS Ref & Jensen being mentioned together? IT WAS A JOKE MAN.


----------



## rexroadj

My B. sorry, yes a smiley would be nice! There are so many jackasses on here that do try and make that comparison I get a little frustrated!


----------



## rockytophigh

rexroadj said:


> My B. sorry, yes a smiley would be nice! There are so many jackasses on here that do try and make that comparison I get a little frustrated!


No, I actually thoroughly enjoyed your review of the reference amps in the other thread. I didn't bother to post because I am going with a 5 channel on this current build and will probably be trying the Rubicon series. The GTO has a Davinci, the truck has the Van Gogh 500.4, and the Camry (budget build) will have the Rubicon. I'm tempted to try the damn reference anyways & add a sub amp lol.


----------



## rexroadj

At the end of the day there are so many good amps, I base my pyramid of quality (not the company by investment.....what am I going to get for more $ whether its sq, features, power, size, etc....when you get to the retail of the rockford power, soundstream ref....I think its about what is going to fit your situation better based on the above....the quality is going to be relatively = in my opinion... Just like if I spend quite a bit more on mcintosh, zapco, brax, tru, etc.... I think those are going to be relatively = to each other as well, I think at that point for me....I am paying for the best possible compenents to give me the longest amount of use etc..... not that the others do not last forever either but I have never heard of a mcintosh or zapco brax etc... failing without someone doing something insanely stupid...I am sure it happens but I bet the ratio is much less. To me thats worth the money. I am someone that does believe that not all amps sound the same, I know its an on going dispute, its like religion I suppose.... I am not saying all those amps sound the same, in fact I dont think any of them sound bad, (ones mentioned) I just make sure they fit the overall plan in my system at the time.. I will say for a 2 channel amp that sounds pretty smooth and has so much effortless power, its really hard to beat (if at all) a t600.2. I love most old school stuff but I do find in a good amount of cases that some of the newer versions are better then the old... I would take my new ss ref over an older one any day of the week without a second thought.... same goes for rockford..... I owned and loved both but prefer the newer versions as different as they may be from the originals.... It sounds/looks like phoenix is making a great leap towards the new ti line and could be interesting to see if its a step near the older ones.... I have a feeling they are going to be from what I read and the pics I saw. They have only been working on new products for 4months and the ti amps were priority #1. A lot of there other stuff is pretty much the same for right now.... That should be intersting when they start hitting the shelves....but just like the ss, rockford, ppi etc.... there are going to be the people that just refuse to give it a shot/admit anything pos. about it.... and judge a product soley by the mother company....I will say that the ss ref amps made me a believer that its possible... If a company that has the reputation they have (not great or good) can make something like the ref amp I think others can make it happen as well.... They are damn fine amps regardless of who bought them, and what price they are!


----------



## cleansoundz

I was completely wrong in my assessment of new school Rockford Fosgate in all areas. In my opinion now, the new stuff is better than the older stuff made. However, there is a special place for the older stuff but it is going to remain in the past.


----------



## cleansoundz

I want to apologize for everyone on my stupidity on this subject.


----------



## ChrisB

Maybe their image will change now that they have severed their ties with Best Buy. I remember a point in time when the Best Buy items were different than the typical Rockford Fosgate amplifiers sold at the custom shops. Then it changed, and Best Buy carried the same Punch amplifiers that the custom shops had, but, never had the Power line.

As for new versus old, there is still a special place in my heart for the pre-HD Punch 45/75/150 and the Power 300/650/1000 from the good old days. In fact, the first major setup I ever saw was owned by one of my uncle's friends, in 87 or 88. He had a Power 1000 running some of those cast frame JBL 6x9 speakers and JBL subs in the rear of his Bronco. Up front he had some ADS gear along with a Nakamichi tape deck and a couple of Nakamichi crossovers in his dash. He used welding leads to run power/ground for the big daddy. I remember riding up and down the Panama City Beach strip in that Bronco with the top off rocking out to Tush by ZZ Top. Ahh, the good old days.


----------



## clbolt

ChrisB said:


> As for new versus old, there is still a special place in my heart for the pre-HD Punch 45/75/150 and the Power 300/650/1000 from the good old days. In fact, the first major setup I ever saw was owned by one of my uncle's friends, in 87 or 88. He had a Power 1000 running some of those cast frame JBL 6x9 speakers and JBL subs in the rear of his Bronco. Up front he had some ADS gear along with a Nakamichi tape deck and a couple of Nakamichi crossovers in his dash. He used welding leads to run power/ground for the big daddy. I remember riding up and down the Panama City Beach strip in that Bronco with the top off rocking out to Tush by ZZ Top. Ahh, the good old days.


I have a hard time thinking of anything past the HD series as being "old school" which is a sign of my age. Like you, those pre-HD Punch amps still strike a chord with me. It was amazing the amount of bass you could get out of a pair of original Punch 10s and a Punch 45. Those tiny little amps sure had a big set of brass balls.

Imagine my surprise when I ordered a 25 to Life Punch 45 when they were first released, expecting an old-school revival. I couldn't find any dimensions for them before I ordered mine, so the size of the new amp was not a happy surprise. Don't get me wrong, that was a lot of amp, but it didn't bring back the old days. I think that's why those amps weren't a commercial success.

I like the cosmetics and performance of the recent high-gloss Punch and Power Series, and would probably have some displayed in my system if I weren't into stealth. I think they're possibly the best looking amps that RF has ever made, and they perform well. However, if RF had the guts, equipment, and employees to do an outright reissue of the original Punch 45, 75, and 150, I'd be camped out on the sidewalk to buy the first ones. Don't even mention the original Power 1000: I was too broke to buy one of the originals, and I'd still be dreaming about a reissue.


----------



## cleansoundz

clbolt said:


> I have a hard time thinking of anything past the HD series as being "old school" which is a sign of my age. Like you, those pre-HD Punch amps still strike a chord with me. It was amazing the amount of bass you could get out of a pair of original Punch 10s and a Punch 45. Those tiny little amps sure had a big set of brass balls.
> 
> Imagine my surprise when I ordered a 25 to Life Punch 45 when they were first released, expecting an old-school revival. I couldn't find any dimensions for them before I ordered mine, so the size of the new amp was not a happy surprise. Don't get me wrong, that was a lot of amp, but it didn't bring back the old days. I think that's why those amps weren't a commercial success.
> 
> I like the cosmetics and performance of the recent high-gloss Punch and Power Series, and would probably have some displayed in my system if I weren't into stealth. I think they're possibly the best looking amps that RF has ever made, and they perform well. However, if RF had the guts, equipment, and employees to do an outright reissue of the original Punch 45, 75, and 150, I'd be camped out on the sidewalk to buy the first ones. Don't even mention the original Power 1000: I was too broke to buy one of the originals, and I'd still be dreaming about a reissue.


I agree with you. The punch 150, 75 and 45 were classics. These new amps will be classics too.


----------



## shawnk

ChrisB said:


> Certain old RF amps actually colored the sound and measured that way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RF, Kicker, MTX, and Linear Power were all known to do something similar to the above at one point in time.


This response graph is for a T500-2. This particular model was in production just a few years ago, therefore I certainly wouldn't consider it "old school".  Rockfords philosophy was to intentionally provide this curve essentially to compensate for typical losses in the automotive enviornment, especially while driving. I may be wrong, but I believe they still employ this on their current amplifiers. I'm certainly not trying to say that this is wrong or a poor design, but I do get a kick out of it when I talk to people who have recently installed a newer RF amp and they claim that the bass and treble are much improved over older models.  I'm a self proclaimed RF nut and 96-00 was also my favorite era of gear. I'm a fan of most of their products prior to and after this period, but I think the fact that since I was out of high shcool and making some real money to buy gear was the big reason for my love of the 96-00 era. I also remember that all of their amps in this era came with "birthsheets" and every new amp had a ruler flat freq response from 20-20k


----------



## HondAudio

I'm hardly a RF savant, but are the "barbeque" amps considered the best, and the "Star Trek" amps considered to be the "last of the good ones"?


----------



## shawnk

It really depends who you talk to. Funny think tho is that the "barbeque" and "star trek" amps you described are precisely my favorite era of their amps 96-00 Some will say that they'll only run anything that's hd era. Some will only run amps that are pre hd. Some of the young pups are straight up new shcool, and that's fine There's one thing I'ld like to add tho. I started to notice a lot of problematic amps Back in 02, I believe it was 02 anyway possibly 01. This was when RF came out with the @2/@IV series. These were the black&grind "star trek" amps. These looked nearly identical to the prior models, the .2/.4 series. The .2 series were also "startrek" black&grind and other than the badge on the heatsink it was difficult to tell apart from the two model years. This, @2/@IV, era was when RF seemed to go mass production. This was right around the time when RF could be purchased from Crutchfield and BestBuy. This is just my personal experience and it might just be a coincidence, but the problems I was encountering did seem to coincide with them mass producing product. Interestingly tho, I never seemed to have a problem with the Power series. Fastfoward a few years later and RF came out with the "T" series. I was VERY impressed with these amps. They had a large footprint, but man o man were they powerfull. Seemed like RF had gone back to there grassroots creating underrated brute amps. Sorry that was long winded, but like I said before.. It really depends on personal preference and a matter of opinion as to which are the bad-boy RF's.

FWIW:
~89-91= pre hd (45,75,150 Power 650)
~92-93= hd era (45hd,75hd,150hd, 30hd, Power100hd ect.)
~94-96= DSM ix x2 era "barbeque" (40,60,100,200,160,240,400,250,500 ect.)
~97-99= .2/.4 era "startrek" (40.2,55.2,60.2,75.2,160.4,400.4,250.2,500.2ect)
~2000 = @2/@IV era "startrek" ([email protected], [email protected],[email protected],[email protected] ect.)
~2001 = "s" series (200s, 700s, intrduction of the "bd" amps 500bd,1500bd)
~2002 = newer s series plus Type RF..x1 x6 x7 ect.. and Limited edition amps ie. 45hd le 75hd le 150hd le & Power 1000 5 channel

This is strictly off the top of my head so I may be off sligthly with the dates. Please don't jump down my back if some of it is wrong. I think it's pretty close.


----------



## jon_k

cleansoundz said:


> They moved overseas in 2008, Thailand to be exact. I am not saying that their quality is worse just very different, that's for sure. I know that in 2003, they had a lot of turnover in their engineering area. I can't put my finger on it.


Actually they decided to target a more consumer level market, as it is larger than the SQ and pro market. That's why things have gone down. The move to China is unrelated, the parts are the same (it's not like the IC's and processor chips weren't made in China the whole time.)


----------



## warmpancakes

china doesnt have the quality control like we do here not even close


----------



## HertzGuy

Pardon my ignorance on the subject but why is this thread only concerned with their amps? I remember when RF subs were at the top of the list when you talked about bass, but what about now? Are their subs still worth it?


----------



## HondAudio

shawnk said:


> It really depends who you talk to. Funny think tho is that the "barbeque" and "star trek" amps you described are precisely my favorite era of their amps 96-00 Some will say that they'll only run anything that's hd era. Some will only run amps that are pre hd. Some of the young pups are straight up new shcool, and that's fine There's one thing I'ld like to add tho. I started to notice a lot of problematic amps Back in 02, I believe it was 02 anyway possibly 01. This was when RF came out with the @2/@IV series. These were the black&grind "star trek" amps. These looked nearly identical to the prior models, the .2/.4 series. The .2 series were also "startrek" black&grind and other than the badge on the heatsink it was difficult to tell apart from the two model years. This, @2/@IV, era was when RF seemed to go mass production. This was right around the time when RF could be purchased from Crutchfield and BestBuy. This is just my personal experience and it might just be a coincidence, but the problems I was encountering did seem to coincide with them mass producing product. Interestingly tho, I never seemed to have a problem with the Power series. Fastfoward a few years later and RF came out with the "T" series. I was VERY impressed with these amps. They had a large footprint, but man o man were they powerfull. Seemed like RF had gone back to there grassroots creating underrated brute amps. Sorry that was long winded, but like I said before.. It really depends on personal preference and a matter of opinion as to which are the bad-boy RF's.
> 
> FWIW:
> ~89-91= pre hd (45,75,150 Power 650)
> ~92-93= hd era (45hd,75hd,150hd, 30hd, Power100hd ect.)
> ~94-96= DSM ix x2 era "barbeque" (40,60,100,200,160,240,400,250,500 ect.)
> ~97-99= .2/.4 era "startrek" (40.2,55.2,60.2,75.2,160.4,400.4,250.2,500.2ect)
> ~2000 = @2/@IV era "startrek" ([email protected], [email protected],[email protected],[email protected] ect.)
> ~2001 = "s" series (200s, 700s, intrduction of the "bd" amps 500bd,1500bd)
> ~2002 = newer s series plus Type RF..x1 x6 x7 ect.. and Limited edition amps ie. 45hd le 75hd le 150hd le & Power 1000 5 channel
> 
> This is strictly off the top of my head so I may be off sligthly with the dates. Please don't jump down my back if some of it is wrong. I think it's pretty close.


The BBQ amps were available when I was in high school and buying stuff, but I ultimately ended up buying my PPIs - the RF amps just didn't have appropriate wattage ratings for me :blush:


----------



## placenta

i just remember these old ones i liked.

Rockford Fosgate Punch 150 OLD SCHOOL Car amp os USED - eBay (item 180462770164 end time Feb-04-10 21:21:09 PST)

i could only afford the Punch 45 even tho i always wanted the Punch 75.


----------



## PimpMySound

warmpancakes said:


> china doesnt have the quality control like we do here not even close


That depends on the factory and not on the country, where the factory is located. Premium brands meanwhile offer very good quality, even with Chinese made products.


----------



## warmpancakes

PimpMySound said:


> That depends on the factory and not on the country, where the factory is located. Premium brands meanwhile offer very good quality, even with Chinese made products.



In my experience with chinese made products (i deal with them daily) the first few runs of a product have huge failure rates then they slowly get better. A product we are having test samples made in china right now the first 100 "samples" had a 100% failure rate, china cannot make quality steel right now they are getting better but slowly


----------



## [email protected]

I've had the Punch 150 ( IMO the best 150 watt amp ever made) punch 60 and 200 trans-anna ( punch 200 was also a stud IMO) and the last Rockfords that I've ever bought were the Punch 600a4 from Best Buy and the Power 800.a2 bought from a local Fosgate dealer (paid $750, and had to wait two mths for Rockford to release it) i never had a good chance to warm up to those, as someone broke into my car an stole them both. That punch 150 i won off a bet from my best friend and it's still going to this day. only had to be repair once, from runing it under impendence. but that sucker would get so hot it's now a dark bronze color lol


----------



## finfinder

The Punch 200 is a stud. I bought my first one in 94 and liked it so much I bought another as a backup the following year. The original 200 is on it's third car and the backup is still sitting on the shelf, nib. It sucks current like a crack ho but still cranks out the lows like the day I bought it. I'm even running it at two ohms bridged mono and it has never shut down once. This was Rockford.


----------



## Maglite

Maybe RF can take a page from the Soundstream marketing team and bring back the Original Punch line. 

If you built it...they will buy.


----------



## PimpMySound

warmpancakes said:


> In my experience with chinese made products (i deal with them daily) the first few runs of a product have huge failure rates then they slowly get better. A product we are having test samples made in china right now the first 100 "samples" had a 100% failure rate, china cannot make quality steel right now they are getting better but slowly


Of course, they need more time to get a good quality. In many cases, I doubt, that manufacturing in China is much cheaper.

The big advantage for all of the car audio brands is, that they don't need to run their own factories in Asia, so they only have to pay their OEM manufacturers for the goods, they have ordered. They don't have to employ own workers in an own factory with own machines, so all the manufacturing risks are gone.


----------



## Ţĥıπģ₣ıѕђ

I have a T400-2 and an 1995 200x2 trans-ana. The 200x2 is far stronger, and sounds more " dynamic ".

I also have a rare Power 50M that I will never part with. It was an absolute beast for a 50x1 amp...... :ninja:


----------



## cleansoundz

Still rocking RF


----------



## finfinder

me too !


----------



## shawnk

RFX-8140......NEW
Symmetry EPX2
2- Punch Status Displays...New
CA-01 output monitor system...New
Audiophile 6.5" comps....New
3-Audiophile 10"
2-Power series 12"...New
5-White Wolf Rca's...New

All just sitting here waiting for that "old school" install  Not sure which amplifiers I want to go with just yet, but something that accepts the PSD's. Also not sure which set of subs to rock either... we'll see


----------



## Cruzer

I have a p400.4 and 2 p2 12s from 2007 rocking in my gf car
I got rf rcas in my truck hehe


----------



## mobeious

warmpancakes said:


> china doesnt have the quality control like we do here not even close


I was watching a program the other day on a motorcycle production plants

japanese plant for honda superbikes production line stoped on average 3 times in 24hrs 

USA harley davison production line stopped on average of 12times in 24hrs

the reason for the line to stop would be missing parts or broke parts


----------



## Darth SQ

mobeious said:


> I was watching a program the other day on a motorcycle production plants
> 
> japanese plant for honda superbikes production line stoped on average 3 times in 24hrs
> 
> USA harley davison production line stopped on average of 12times in 24hrs
> 
> the reason for the line to stop would be missing parts or broke parts


I look at Harley Davidson failures for a living and I have never seen the quality so low. The old school techs are saying it's worse then the AMF years.
Look for an ownership change at HD.


----------



## mmiller

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> I look at Harley Davidson failures for a living and I have never seen the quality so low. The old school techs are saying it's worse then the AMF years.
> Look for an ownership change at HD.


Harley Davidson is not charging Low quality prices either......


----------



## PPI_GUY

My very first 'system' was based around two Punch 45's and an XV-1 crossover. One of the 45's powered 4 Kicker Free-Air 10" subs and the other powered a set of RF Punch Plates. The headunit was a Nakamichi RD-350 cassette/tuner. Later, I added a PA-1 pre-amp. This was around 1988-89. It was all very poorly installed by the local shop in my '79 Trans Am. Fisnished 3rd in a local contest and thought I was flying! LOL!
The subs were still underpowered but, those Punch 45's were greatly under-rated. The XV-1 crossover was JUNK. Upgraded to a Sony never looked back.
Around 1990, I saw a single original Punch 75 running at .25 ohm in a regionals contest and not fail. It was hot enough to fry eggs on but, didn't shut down.


----------



## sonic purity

Still got my T3002 that I did a review on, and its a great amp.


----------



## cleansoundz

Rockford old and new is good.


----------



## Danometal

I've been running a P1000-1bd @ 2 ohms for 1.5 years. I would buy again, but it's not looking like it's going to die anytime soon. I'm thinking on grabbing a 4 channel and a 2 channel for tweets to match.


----------



## jimmy2345

Ask Steve Meade....he still claims new Rockford gear is SQ gear and can run with the best of them. Someone pinch him....he's dreaming.

All that bass must have killed his hearing.


----------



## bigdwiz

I've had a Punch 45HD since 1992 and have used it off an on over the years, mostly at 1ohm stereo loads (or equivalent using tri-mode with passive x-overs). The amp has never given me any problems at all. My birth sheet stated output power as 91.1 w/ch into 2 ohms stereo.

I also have some newer RF amps; 2002 Power 550x in my daily driver, several of the "25 to Life" amps (from 2005) and the Power T3002 and T4004. I've not tried any of the most recent RF amps, so I can't comment on build quality or SQ. All I know is the RF amps I have are quality products. 

I prefer the old school amps, not because they are better, but because they are powerful and still work great for me. In addition to RF, I'm a big Orion, Phoenix Gold and PPI fan (again, the early-mid 1990's amps). There are not many amps with "guts" as nice as the Phoenix Gold MS and MPS series (just make sure you get those caps replaced!)


----------



## rexroadj

jimmy2345 said:


> Ask Steve Meade....he still claims new Rockford gear is SQ gear and can run with the best of them. Someone pinch him....he's dreaming.
> 
> All that bass must have killed his hearing.


Thats because it can! I am traditionally not a huge rockford fan, always been impresse with there power but that was it (althought over the years I have a new found respect for more then just the "power" I was so respectful of) The new Power amps are nothing short of spectacular. Tons of clean power in a small sleek look. If you want a ton of features then look elsewhere. If you want to powerfully reproduce a clean signal then I suggest giving them a try. As for there subs/components...... Again there power series of both can be extremely impressive if you have a clue what your doing


----------



## cleansoundz

rexroadj said:


> Thats because it can! I am traditionally not a huge rockford fan, always been impresse with there power but that was it (althought over the years I have a new found respect for more then just the "power" I was so respectful of) The new Power amps are nothing short of spectacular. Tons of clean power in a small sleek look. If you want a ton of features then look elsewhere. If you want to powerfully reproduce a clean signal then I suggest giving them a try. As for there subs/components...... Again there power series of both can be extremely impressive if you have a clue what your doing


I am currently using 2007 series of RF amps in my vehicles mainly the t1000-1BDCP and T400-4 and I am very impressed with the power and clarity from the amps. Once I upgraded my speakers then that just made things so much better. With a combination of quality speakers along with RF Power series amps, you will be amazed.


----------



## 3fish

rexroadj said:


> We here are about %1 of the audio community. We have strict standards and are elite audiophiles (what ever the hell you want to call yourselfs) Companys are not going to be making things with the same goals as they used to. Its about smaller, cooler, more efficient, and affordable units


What the hell happend Tripath and their t class chips? Seemed to be the holy grail no?


----------



## 3fish

ChrisB said:


> Certain old RF amps actually colored the sound and measured that way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RF, Kicker, MTX, and Linear Power were all known to do something similar to the above at one point in time.


LMAO, I'm glad someone found this and posted it!


----------



## rexroadj

3fish said:


> LMAO, I'm glad someone found this and posted it!


Yes, and do you know why it was done???? This is the problem with how certain groups decide to absorb info such as that graph....... It is done to work around in car response. It does work. Is it for everyone or every situation? No, of course not! Should the amps be faulted for it? NO, because it serves a purpose for several installations. I find the sound very pleasing. But who cares....the graph shows waves so it must not be worth a damn

If a tube amp does it, its cool though right?


----------



## cleansoundz

The subtle bumps in curves in certain frequencies are not extreme by any means. They are small bumps in the midrange areas. With today's technology in head units or equalizers, the bumps can be turned down.


----------



## rexroadj

But in often cases you wouldnt want to! Depends on the components and install. In SEVERAL cases it would be a nice addition. The newer power class amps also have a bump too. Its just a little lower in the range then the older ones. Again, your not likely to notice side by side depending on the situation. I would venture to guess it would be a noticable positive. I know in my truck it was a great sounding setup. I ran it on my sub (t600-2) and then later on I ran my set of OZ Audio matrix 3 ways via the passive (240ish a side) and it was a superb sounding setup! Loved the power!


----------



## arw01

This thread makes me feel a whole lot better about the impulse purchase at a pawn shop the other day. A P400.4 for $124. I put it on layaway.

I bought it instead of a Kenwood KAC-X811D mono block amp. 

Plan is to use the audio-control 2xs to bridge it for the 10" sub. Maybe use the other two channels for the l6 up front, and use my 4 channel kenwood for the tweaters and the rear fill.


----------



## jimmy2345

rexroadj said:


> Thats because it can! I am traditionally not a huge rockford fan, always been impresse with there power but that was it (althought over the years I have a new found respect for more then just the "power" I was so respectful of) The new Power amps are nothing short of spectacular. Tons of clean power in a small sleek look. If you want a ton of features then look elsewhere. If you want to powerfully reproduce a clean signal then I suggest giving them a try. As for there subs/components...... Again there power series of both can be extremely impressive if you have a clue what your doing



Impressive in what way....to impressively lack fidelity and transparency.


----------



## jimmy2345

rexroadj said:


> Yes, and do you know why it was done???? This is the problem with how certain groups decide to absorb info such as that graph....... It is done to work around in car response. It does work. Is it for everyone or every situation? No, of course not! Should the amps be faulted for it? NO, because it serves a purpose for several installations. I find the sound very pleasing. But who cares....the graph shows waves so it must not be worth a damn
> 
> If a tube amp does it, its cool though right?



Agreed. It was done to make up for common in car difficiencies.


----------



## 14642

ChrisB said:


> Certain old RF amps actually colored the sound and measured that way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RF, Kicker, MTX, and Linear Power were all known to do something similar to the above at one point in time.


Yes, that's the Punch EQ. been around for years. Boost at 45Hz and 12kHz. Yes, that's audible because the Q of the filters is low.


----------



## ChrisB

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Yes, that's the Punch EQ. been around for years. Boost at 45Hz and 12kHz. Yes, that's audible because the Q of the filters is low.


I want to say that even my beloved generation 1 and 2 Punch 150s from back in the day still had a tiny bit of EQ even when the bass and treble were set at 0.


----------



## rexroadj

jimmy2345 said:


> Impressive in what way....to impressively lack fidelity and transparency.


Ignorance is bliss

Continue to be happy!

Thats just completely false and clearly you have failed to give it a shot. Your just hating the name on the front, nothing more nothing less. Pretty valuable info from you though:laugh:


----------



## ChrisB

rexroadj said:


> Ignorance is bliss
> 
> Continue to be happy!
> 
> Thats just completely false and clearly you have failed to give it a shot. Your just hating the name on the front, nothing more nothing less. Pretty valuable info from you though:laugh:


If we had mentioned Blues Car Audio, Linear Power, or the Alpine 7909 being the best ever known to mankind, he would have been besides himself.


----------



## rexroadj

ChrisB said:


> If we had mentioned Blues Car Audio, Linear Power, or the Alpine 7909 being the best ever known to mankind, he would have been besides himself.


:laugh: 


Merry Christmas Yall!!!


----------



## jimmy2345

ChrisB said:


> If we had mentioned Blues Car Audio, Linear Power, or the Alpine 7909 being the best ever known to mankind, he would have been besides himself.


If we were talking about people who flip flop on their subjective opinions consistently....we could call your name.

If we were talking about people who admit to not being an audiophile but still states opinions on products they have never even heard....we could call your name.

If we were talking about people who admit that adding another battery to their vehicle to have the ability to run a better SQ amp is too much to ask....we could call your name.

If we were talking about people who claim that a horrible sounding Clarion amp can hold it's own against one of the most famous SQ names in car audio.....then we can call your name.....and also call you full of ****!!


All of this taken into consideration, leads any rational person to believe your statements lack credibility. Just your lack of consistency and mind-changing is enough.


----------



## rexroadj

jimmy2345 said:


> Impressive in what way....to impressively lack fidelity and transparency.


If were talking about people who have no ****ing clue......We can call your name!

Careful who's card your trying to pull on here rube!
Your statements arent really anything to go throwing into the wind! (pissing into the wind)


----------



## ChrisB

jimmy2345 said:


> If we were talking about people who flip flop on their subjective opinions consistently....we could call your name.
> 
> If we were talking about people who admit to not being an audiophile but still states opinions on products they have never even heard....we could call your name.
> 
> If we were talking about people who admit that adding another battery to their vehicle to have the ability to run a better SQ amp is too much to ask....we could call your name.
> 
> If we were talking about people who claim that a horrible sounding Clarion amp can hold it's own against one of the most famous SQ names in car audio.....then we can call your name.....and also call you full of ****!!
> 
> 
> All of this taken into consideration, leads any rational person to believe your statements lack credibility. Just your lack of consistency and mind-changing is enough.


Merry Christmas to you too Jimmy! At least I managed to learn from my mistakes and continually evolve in this hobby whereas you continually preach "the good old days" that are good and gone. Please feel free to continuously relive the 80s and 90s while technology passes you by. Speaking of reliving your past, how's that search for a DPS500 going?


----------



## orakulo

After reading the whole topic I feel more comfortable.

I've been out of the car audio scene for almost 10 years. And back in the day RF and Soundstream were the best for amps (RF also for subs with JL).

Now I decided to start a new set, and my first tough was "ok let's get RF's amps", and I was shocked when I found out that the brand wasn't a reference anymore, and people barely speak about it.

My disappointment has gone after I found this topic. And definitely I'll buy a T1500bd to use with a Polk SR104DVC, and a T600.4 to use with a HAT Imagine.

Long live to RF


----------



## cleansoundz

I learned to appreciate the quality of the newer RF again from this thread.


----------



## orakulo

Anyone here using 2010/2011 T line?


----------



## cleansoundz

Yeah, I am using a T1000-1BDCP and T400-4 in my truck and they work effortlessly and sound superb with the right speakers. In my 300zx, I am using a T1000-1BDCP and T400-4.


----------



## UMWDawg92

I ran a 2009 model T400-2 and loved it great power for the size of the thing and sounded clean and not to mention I thought it looked really nice. Now I'm using some of the old DSM models right now a Punch 200ix and the sound is similar to the new T400 I had, I peronally prefer my Punch 200, seems to stay cleaner at higher volumes and may even put out more power but the downfall is it gets much hotter than my t400 ever did.


----------



## cleansoundz

UMWDawg92 said:


> I ran a 2009 model T400-2 and loved it great power for the size of the thing and sounded clean and not to mention I thought it looked really nice. Now I'm using some of the old DSM models right now a Punch 200ix and the sound is similar to the new T400 I had, I peronally prefer my Punch 200, seems to stay cleaner at higher volumes and may even put out more power but the downfall is it gets much hotter than my t400 ever did.


I am glad that you are giving the old and new RF amplifier props. I have a few oldies that I love as well but I like my T1000-1BDCP, T400-4 and T1000-1BD amps as well.


----------



## cleansoundz

My T400-4 sounds exactly the same as my Power 400a4.


----------



## jimmy2345

There is no doubt that the newer Rockford amps produce clean power, but what made Rockford what they were in the beginning was lost long ago. They had a true SQ sonic signature that they haven't had in years. I am referring to the original Power 300, 650, 1000, and Punch 75 and 150 etc. Clean is clean....clean is not fidelity.


----------



## Jsracing

The last RF amp I had was back in 2000. I think it was a punch 400a4 , if that model matches up with the year. I loved it...great amp, great power. No problems that I didn't cause. Sadly it got stolen along with my Xtant x604. I've bren told nothing but good things about their current Power line and would have no problems running the Punch or Power series if they have the power, size, and features I'm looking for. But I do miss my old RF.


----------



## audioinfo

orakulo said:


> Anyone here using 2010/2011 T line?



I've got a new T2500-1bdcp and I could not be happier. It's pushing 3 Boston Acoustic SPG 555's on a 1.25 - 1.30 ohm load. 


In the past I've had some legend amps myself. Phoenix Gold M100, Alpine MRV 1507 and some others. IMO the new Power series from Rockford I'd have nothing but good things to say.


----------



## Dmax11

i would like to point out that this graph looks dramatic due to the small scale its placed on

top peak to bottom curve is less than 3 db its actually only 1.75 db dif. 3db is the minimum change in audio that a person can typically detect.

next i will present you with an RTA graph of my sound system that consists of only 2 amps during this test a RF T400.4 and a P6001bd.

this test was done with no EQ or any settings changed on my HU or amps. both front and rear xovers on the 400.4 are set to all pass.










in car systems there are much more larger peaks and valleys created by the speakers and their listening environments than that slight curve built into the amp that is barely if at all audible to the human ear.


----------



## orakulo

Hey guys check my topic about T line Vs MbQuarts Q line

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...q-series-vs-fosgate-t-series.html#post1334923


----------



## cleansoundz

jimmy2345 said:


> There is no doubt that the newer Rockford amps produce clean power, but what made Rockford what they were in the beginning was lost long ago. They had a true SQ sonic signature that they haven't had in years. I am referring to the original Power 300, 650, 1000, and Punch 75 and 150 etc. Clean is clean....clean is not fidelity.


Untrue. I used 2 Punch 75s along with an AF 2 crossover with Polk Audio separates in my Honda Civic for 7 years and I didn't see any differences in sound with my current setup which consist of the t400-4 and t1000-1bdcp on Crossfire separates. I recently played with my old punch 75, 45 and 150 amps in the garage and didn't hear any distinct differences either.


----------



## cleansoundz

Dmax11 said:


> i would like to point out that this graph looks dramatic due to the small scale its placed on
> 
> top peak to bottom curve is less than 3 db its actually only 1.75 db dif. 3db is the minimum change in audio that a person can typically detect.
> 
> next i will present you with an RTA graph of my sound system that consists of only 2 amps during this test a RF T400.4 and a P6001bd.
> 
> this test was done with no EQ or any settings changed on my HU or amps. both front and rear xovers on the 400.4 are set to all pass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> in car systems there are much more larger peaks and valleys created by the speakers and their listening environments than that slight curve built into the amp that is barely if at all audible to the human ear.


Good observation.


----------



## jimmy2345

cleansoundz said:


> Untrue. I used 2 Punch 75s along with an AF 2 crossover with Polk Audio separates in my Honda Civic for 7 years and I didn't see any differences in sound with my current setup which consist of the t400-4 and t1000-1bdcp on Crossfire separates. I recently played with my old punch 75, 45 and 150 amps in the garage and didn't hear any distinct differences either.


You are using mediocre drivers. You are only as good as your weakest link.

What reason do I have to make this up? I have owned just about every amp Rockford has ever made. There is a reason the originals still sell for as much or more than the newer amps.


----------



## pikers

The people that complain about old vs new aren't audiophiles. They're the same ones that assume that all outsourcing is bad, then turn the bass and treble all the way up and wonder why the amp shuts off or blows things up. I sold the older Rockford (1997 - 2000), and own two of the T Series from 2005-ish. Drives any reasonable load, is underrated from a power perspective, and never gets unreasonably warm. The brand new stuff, well, hard to say. I can tell you that with all the crap flooding the market and wattage continuing to be a source of mistrust, it could be that increasing the fuse amperage is a way to make things look more powerful. In most cases, buying the upper end of any reputable brand is a solid course of action.


----------



## jimmy2345

pikers said:


> The people that complain about old vs new aren't audiophiles. They're the same ones that assume that all outsourcing is bad, then turn the bass and treble all the way up and wonder why the amp shuts off or blows things up. I sold the older Rockford (1997 - 2000), and own two of the T Series from 2005-ish. Drives any reasonable load, is underrated from a power perspective, and never gets unreasonably warm. The brand new stuff, well, hard to say. I can tell you that with all the crap flooding the market and wattage continuing to be a source of mistrust, it could be that increasing the fuse amperage is a way to make things look more powerful. In most cases, buying the upper end of any reputable brand is a solid course of action.


It's funny how the argument became old vs. new isn't it? Think about it. I wonder why?

Is it because the majority of new amplifiers don't hold a candle to the old? Is it because every reputable name from the hay days of car audio don't make a product as good as the products that built their name and reputation (barring a small few).

It's not an argument of old vs. new essentially. It just turned into that from the pattern of junk equipment hitting the market.


----------



## cleansoundz

jimmy2345 said:


> You are using mediocre drivers. You are only as good as your weakest link.
> 
> What reason do I have to make this up? I have owned just about every amp Rockford has ever made. There is a reason the originals still sell for as much or more than the newer amps.


Nostalgia. I will admit though that when I hooked up my punch 150 2 years ago to my 2 10's I was pleasantly surprised on the amount of bass that little amp put out. Don't discount the new.


----------



## Bluliner

cleansoundz said:


> Untrue. I used 2 Punch 75s along with an AF 2 crossover with Polk Audio separates in my Honda Civic for 7 years and I didn't see any differences in sound with my current setup which consist of the t400-4 and t1000-1bdcp on Crossfire separates. I recently played with my old punch 75, 45 and 150 amps in the garage and didn't hear any distinct differences either.


What crossover are you using?

The onboard x-overs in post-Y2K RF amps, IMO, suck. The older RF amps used X-cards which sound quite a bit better. Lots of old amps used chips/SIPs and whatnot and usually performed well. A/B testing SIPs (Xtant - 12dB) vs. the digital x-overs in some super wazoo Eclipse thing 6 or so years ago; the SIPs sounded better. I tried everything back then to make the DSP (x-over, EQ, T/A) sound good in that Eclipse but ended up returning it... it could be in my head though 

When I was looking for some O/S RF amps recently, I made it priority to buy x-card equipped amps or no x-over at all.


----------



## jimmy2345

cleansoundz said:


> Nostalgia. I will admit though that when I hooked up my punch 150 2 years ago to my 2 10's I was pleasantly surprised on the amount of bass that little amp put out. Don't discount the new.


Nostalgia has nothing to do with it. I never even used Rockford back when they were good. I have owned and used them since and also compared them directly with their current replacements. Something that most who pose this argument haven't done, or have the means to do. I use another brand now so their is no bias. Just true facts based on what my ears can hear.

What's good is good. ....no matter how old or new it is. If Rockfords were more than just clean today...I would have no argument. They lack alot, just as many others.

Also, even though I pointed out you use mediocre drivers you chose not to address that issue. The speaker is what plays the music you know....


----------



## cleansoundz

jimmy2345 said:


> Nostalgia has nothing to do with it. I never even used Rockford back when they were good. I have owned and used them since and also compared them directly with their current replacements. Something that most who pose this argument haven't done, or have the means to do. I use another brand now so their is no bias. Just true facts based on what my ears can hear.
> 
> What's good is good. ....no matter how old or new it is. If Rockfords were more than just clean today...I would have no argument. They lack alot, just as many others.
> 
> Also, even though I pointed out you use mediocre drivers you chose not to address that issue. The speaker is what plays the music you know....


I can't remember the model number of the speakers in my civic since it was close to 20 years old but they were at the time top of the line Polk Audio 5 1/4 inch separates and at the time my system was custom installed at Al&Eds in 1992. Everything at the time was top of the line especially my head unit. The crossover was an RF AF2 and the head unit was an Alpine. Trust me there was no weak link in my system so don't use that excuse. The system itself lasted seven years easily with nothing blowing out and the sound was crystal clear. I had 2 Punch 75s not the HD model but the models before the HD that had the internal fuses. Before then I used 1 Punch 75 on mids and highs and a punch 150 on two 10 inch kickers in a ported box through an XV-1 crossover. i had that system for about 2 years. I have used a T5002, T4004, T400-4, T10001BD, T1000-1BD, T1000-1BDCP, Punch 400.4, Power 250.1, Punch 240.4, Power 400a4, Power BD1000a1, Punch 200a4 and on and on. They all sound good. One thing I will say though is anything around 1989-2000 seemed to be better built. When I hold my Power BD1000a1 and Power400a4 vs. my T1000-1BDCP and T400-4 I can feel the difference in the USA made quality of the older stuff. If I didn't swap out systems so much over the years I would easily re-install my Power400a4 and Power BD1000a1 (I still may).

Anyway there is a place for old and new RF.


----------



## ChrisB

Didn't the reputation of Rockford Fosgate take a nosedive when they linked up with Best Buy? At one time, I tend to remember Best Buy offering only limited models from the Punch series whereas most Rockford dealers could get anything from the full product lineup.


----------



## cleansoundz

I didn't even like RF when they went to Best Buy. That pissed me off.


----------



## Bluliner

cleansoundz said:


> They all sound good. One thing I will say though is anything around 1989-2000 seemed to be better built. *When I hold my Power BD1000a1 and Power400a4 vs. my T1000-1BDCP and T400-4 I can feel the difference in the USA made quality of the older stuff.* If I didn't swap out systems so much over the years I would easily re-install my Power400a4 and Power BD1000a1 (I still may).
> 
> Anyway there is a place for old and new RF.


What you're feeling is the heft of a real heat sink. The heat sink is expensive and it's cheaper to glue a DC fan somewhere than to add more extruded aluminum to the heat sink. Remember, those things have to ship from China and bigger heat sinks would mean more $$$ to ship. And they're not being made there b/c of Chinese engineering expertise or advances in thermodynamics...it's all about cost cutting. 

And if you think that BD1000 is good...get yourself an 1100a2 or 500.2. Personally, I felt the BD1000 was kinda gutless compared to those two amps.

...

When RF went to Best Buy, it was still damn good product. It was a hit against their reputation from enthusiasts much like hipsters get all pissy when "their band" sells out. 

Fast forward a few years and it really did go to ****. Not sure if that was Best Buy bullying RF into lower cost products & a better dealer agreement -or- RF bit off more than it could chew and went on a massive cost-cutting initiative to remain viable. Only the finance dept really knows. But something did happen; whether it was RF's decision to target downmarket -or- part of their Best Buy agreement - they've still done over a decade worth of damage to their "brand" and the hey-day of deck & 4 / amp & 2x12's is in the twilight.

It's all uphill for RF. If the product is good, people will buy it...I'm just not sure if it's a good product and I'm sure there are many who share the same opinion as me. Made in China, lots of plastic, feels cheap...not like the RF of old, that's for sure.


----------



## lowblueranger

I like the new mono amps but I'll take my old dsm, .2, 300 650 1000 power series anyday. Personal preference of course- but I'm running a punch 200.2 (took my T600-2 out, because to me the punch sounds better) on my mids and highs and T2500-1 on subwoofers.


----------



## cleansoundz

Bluliner said:


> What you're feeling is the heft of a real heat sink. The heat sink is expensive and it's cheaper to glue a DC fan somewhere than to add more extruded aluminum to the heat sink. Remember, those things have to ship from China and bigger heat sinks would mean more $$$ to ship. And they're not being made there b/c of Chinese engineering expertise or advances in thermodynamics...it's all about cost cutting.
> 
> And if you think that BD1000 is good...get yourself an 1100a2 or 500.2. Personally, I felt the BD1000 was kinda gutless compared to those two amps.
> 
> ...
> 
> When RF went to Best Buy, it was still damn good product. It was a hit against their reputation from enthusiasts much like hipsters get all pissy when "their band" sells out.
> 
> Fast forward a few years and it really did go to ****. Not sure if that was Best Buy bullying RF into lower cost products & a better dealer agreement -or- RF bit off more than it could chew and went on a massive cost-cutting initiative to remain viable. Only the finance dept really knows. But something did happen; whether it was RF's decision to target downmarket -or- part of their Best Buy agreement - they've still done over a decade worth of damage to their "brand" and the hey-day of deck & 4 / amp & 2x12's is in the twilight.
> 
> It's all uphill for RF. If the product is good, people will buy it...I'm just not sure if it's a good product and I'm sure there are many who share the same opinion as me. Made in China, lots of plastic, feels cheap...not like the RF of old, that's for sure.



Well said and I agree with everything you say. I know there was a period when the main engineer left the company. I think it was around 2003.


----------



## orakulo

For the T's line price range, what the best options in the market right now?


----------



## AAAAAAA

jimmy2345 said:


> Nostalgia has nothing to do with it. I never even used Rockford back when they were good...


Nostalagia has everything to do with it.




> ...Just true facts based on what my ears can hear.


This statement is an oxymoron. Ears and hearing are anything but reliable and trusthworthy and certainly not a foundation to build facts on.


It is funny how members here now remember something like the power1100a2 and think it is one of the better amps RF made... when it came out people talked and claimed the "a" series couldn't hold a candle to the "point" series and so it has gone since, the new series can never hold up to the older ones. It's the same year in and year out. It's as if perception was reality and not the other way around.


----------



## cleansoundz

I love the performance of my T1000-1BDCP, T1000-1BD and T400-4. I have the T1000-1BDCP and T400-4 in my truck and the T1000-1BD and T400-4 in my 300zx. I loved the way the T4004 and T10001BD sounded but they were too damn big. I always go back and forth about re-installing my Power BD1000a1 and Power400a4 but the T1000-1BDCP and T400-4 are performing flawlessly.


----------



## cleansoundz

orakulo said:


> For the T's line price range, what the best options in the market right now?


The T1000-1BDCP is one of the best options right now. The one I bought gives me 1500 watts at 1 and 2 ohms. I run my subs at 2 ohms though. Any of the power series is of good value. If you want to to save money though look on EBAY and buy from Tristateaudio and grandslamstereo. They are good sellers who I bought from many years ago. My latest power series stuff came from an authorized dealer because I like the idea of having a warranty.


----------



## tyroneshoes

The new rockfords are smaller, more powerful, more efficient and do have a flat response curve. The new rockfords are superior to the punch dsm in every way except nostalgic reasons. 

I just got a new p500.1bd and its a great sub amp. Still grossly overbuilt and under rated, differential inputs, nice features, good thermal management and great aesthetics imo.

There is nothing wrong with current rockford amps at all. Call them up and you still get great tech support and they will discuss old vs current. Their boards are clean and organized and use high quality components. 

If I didnt need the dsp, I would have stuck with the current rockford punch series instead of the dc ref. Small, efficient and good power. The punch series seems to be as under rated as the power series and are smaller and look nicer imo. They provide birthsheets for all the amps on the website using powercube which is a great reference.

They did seem to fall off on speakers a bit but I have limited listening experience since the RF audiophile series.


----------



## Bluliner

tyroneshoes said:


> The new rockfords are smaller, more powerful, more efficient and do have a flat response curve. The new rockfords are superior to the punch dsm *on paper* in every way except nostalgic reasons.


FTFY

What Chinese build house/prison are they coming out of? What other manupackagers use the same factory and how similar are the end products sans packaging? While that doesn't make it a bad amp, it certainly doesn't make it a RF amp if it's a badge engineered Pyramid. 

CDs are superior to vinyl in every way, shape, and form...until you hear the two side by side. If you clean your ears regularly, the difference is easy to spot. Once the music hits your ears; all that spec-sheet marketing babble doesn't mean much. Good is good, bad is bad. You can't look at a spec sheet for two separate speakers and immediately know which is better for you. The same holds true for amplifiers.

A watt is not a watt; and that's why some prefer the old to the new. The debate about the sound of a "watt" is like debating religion...it can get messy. 

So here's a non-scientific experiment you can do next time you're at a big box store; demo a cheap Denon & Yamaha stereo receiver and give it the A/B test. Fewer bells & whistles the better...do you hear a difference? Sure do...which one sounds warmer and which one sounds a little 'thin'? 

It's a little harder to this with car amps though...unless you own/work at a shop. And if you do, put an O/S amp on display and A/B test it. Hear a difference? If you really want to pick on a new amp; find a tightly regulated one (JL is a good example) and compare that to the unregulated old Fosgate. Which one sounds warm and dynamic and which amp makes everything sound like an MP3? You decide. 

Your ears will never lie. Marketers, shop employees, and even engineers will bend things either knowingly or by mistake. Your ears though? Never.

To me, the old stuff sounds better AND has sentimental value...you can't beat that.


----------



## jimmy2345

AAAAAAA said:


> Nostalagia has everything to do with it.


Explain to me how you know what is going on in my mind that makes it nostalgia? I have already stated I don't even use Rockford (old or new) so there is no bias.

Not to mention, I live in a new home, drive a new car, have an iphone, listen to an ipod, use an iMac and MBP, etc.....

.....so why do I like the older amps? If it were nostalgia, then why don't I like wood paneling in my home, landlines, typewriters, a vehicle I drove as a kid, use tapes, etc.

I will tell you why. Because a lot of things were surpassed. Car amplifiers are not one of those things. Yes, some may be more efficient but as I have stated many times; I am willing to upgrade my electrical if need be to get all that extra sound in my ears. The thing is, a moderate level of class AB power really doesn't warrant an electrical upgrade anyways. So most of you who aren't competing in SPL are sacrificing SQ for cheap power, and minimal efficiency gains.


Before I get the the common "I run the new series and my system is clean and sounds great"; there is a huge difference between just being clean and having fidelity. If you didn't know this then you haven't heard a true SQ system.


----------



## tyroneshoes

Bluliner said:


> FTFY
> 
> What Chinese build house/prison are they coming out of? What other manupackagers use the same factory and how similar are the end products sans packaging? While that doesn't make it a bad amp, it certainly doesn't make it a RF amp if it's a badge engineered Pyramid.
> 
> CDs are superior to vinyl in every way, shape, and form...until you hear the two side by side. If you clean your ears regularly, the difference is easy to spot. Once the music hits your ears; all that spec-sheet marketing babble doesn't mean much. Good is good, bad is bad. You can't look at a spec sheet for two separate speakers and immediately know which is better for you. The same holds true for amplifiers.
> 
> A watt is not a watt; and that's why some prefer the old to the new. The debate about the sound of a "watt" is like debating religion...it can get messy.
> 
> So here's a non-scientific experiment you can do next time you're at a big box store; demo a cheap Denon & Yamaha stereo receiver and give it the A/B test. Fewer bells & whistles the better...do you hear a difference? Sure do...which one sounds warmer and which one sounds a little 'thin'?
> 
> It's a little harder to this with car amps though...unless you own/work at a shop. And if you do, put an O/S amp on display and A/B test it. Hear a difference? If you really want to pick on a new amp; find a tightly regulated one (JL is a good example) and compare that to the unregulated old Fosgate. Which one sounds warm and dynamic and which amp makes everything sound like an MP3? You decide.
> 
> Your ears will never lie. Marketers, shop employees, and even engineers will bend things either knowingly or by mistake. Your ears though? Never.
> 
> To me, the old stuff sounds better AND has sentimental value...you can't beat that.


Dont get me wrong, I used to run two punch 60s and a punch 100 of the old days. Loved them. The new stuff sounds good too and if you look at the internals, youll see Rockford is doing something different from most manufacturers, certainly pyramid (howd company that even get in here).

Whats FTFW?

All I recently did was swap a zapco ref500.1 for a p500.1bd and preferred the rockford. Albeit its a sub amp, I have heard rockford current power models in my friends cars and they are certainly no slouch. Ill take new tech over old tech anyday unless I can get some os Zapco studios which zapco had to underbuild (in comparison) to create the ref line to make it more affordable.

Plus I just like they way they look. Clean and understated with very nice terminals but heavy as **** due to a huge heatsink.

Its a nice looking amp. They way amps should look imo


----------



## envisionelec

Bluliner said:


> FTFY
> 
> What Chinese build house/prison are they coming out of? What other manupackagers use the same factory and how similar are the end products sans packaging? While that doesn't make it a bad amp, it certainly doesn't make it a RF amp if it's a badge engineered Pyramid.
> 
> CDs are superior to vinyl in every way, shape, and form...until you hear the two side by side. If you clean your ears regularly, the difference is easy to spot. Once the music hits your ears; all that spec-sheet marketing babble doesn't mean much. Good is good, bad is bad. You can't look at a spec sheet for two separate speakers and immediately know which is better for you. The same holds true for amplifiers.
> 
> A watt is not a watt; and that's why some prefer the old to the new. The debate about the sound of a "watt" is like debating religion...it can get messy.
> 
> So here's a non-scientific experiment you can do next time you're at a big box store; demo a cheap Denon & Yamaha stereo receiver and give it the A/B test. Fewer bells & whistles the better...do you hear a difference? Sure do...which one sounds warmer and which one sounds a little 'thin'?
> 
> It's a little harder to this with car amps though...unless you own/work at a shop. And if you do, put an O/S amp on display and A/B test it. Hear a difference? If you really want to pick on a new amp; find a tightly regulated one (JL is a good example) and compare that to the unregulated old Fosgate. Which one sounds warm and dynamic and which amp makes everything sound like an MP3? You decide.
> 
> Your ears will never lie. Marketers, shop employees, and even engineers will bend things either knowingly or by mistake. Your ears though? Never.
> 
> To me, the old stuff sounds better AND has sentimental value...you can't beat that.


These are terrible ideas. Fewer bells and whistles means nothing. Vinyl vs CD - please don't. It's a 10 for 10 for CD at the last "audiophile" test I attended. 

Regulated vs Unregulated - no difference. A wet cell car battery is as stiffly regulated as you're going to get. Anything else is just making up for crappy connections and long runs of wire.

I've not seen one RF amplifier with a Korean or Chinese house-brand PCB/design inside. It's probably one of the reasons they're still in business. Take it or leave it.


----------



## cleansoundz

jimmy2345 said:


> Explain to me how you know what is going on in my mind that makes it nostalgia? I have already stated I don't even use Rockford (old or new) so there is no bias.
> 
> Not to mention, I live in a new home, drive a new car, have an iphone, listen to an ipod, use an iMac and MBP, etc.....
> 
> .....so why do I like the older amps? If it were nostalgia, then why don't I like wood paneling in my home, landlines, typewriters, a vehicle I drove as a kid, use tapes, etc.
> 
> I will tell you why. Because a lot of things were surpassed. Car amplifiers are not one of those things. Yes, some may be more efficient but as I have stated many times; I am willing to upgrade my electrical if need be to get all that extra sound in my ears. The thing is, a moderate level of class AB power really doesn't warrant an electrical upgrade anyways. So most of you who aren't competing in SPL are sacrificing SQ for cheap power, and minimal efficiency gains.
> 
> 
> Before I get the the common "I run the new series and my system is clean and sounds great"; there is a huge difference between just being clean and having fidelity. If you didn't know this then you haven't heard a true SQ system.


SQ is very subjective though. What works for you doesn't work for everyone else. You can't just assume that just because a person isn't using a certain quality amp (class AB) by a certain brand that they don't know SQ. Dynamics are very different for each car. Speakers make a huge difference. Most people who read that statement you made in the last post would tell you to fly a kite.


----------



## envisionelec

jimmy2345 said:


> Before I get the the common "I run the new series and my system is clean and sounds great"; there is a huge difference between just being clean and having fidelity. If you didn't know this then you haven't heard a true SQ system.


Your posts couldn't be more divergent from one to the next. This one makes good sense; while others make none at all. Please get some help.


----------



## rexroadj

jimmy2345 said:


> Explain to me how you know what is going on in my mind that makes it nostalgia? I have already stated I don't even use Rockford (old or new) so there is no bias.
> 
> Not to mention, I live in a new home, drive a new car, have an iphone, listen to an ipod, use an iMac and MBP, etc.....
> 
> .....so why do I like the older amps? If it were nostalgia, then why don't I like wood paneling in my home, landlines, typewriters, a vehicle I drove as a kid, use tapes, etc.
> 
> I will tell you why. Because a lot of things were surpassed. Car amplifiers are not one of those things. Yes, some may be more efficient but as I have stated many times; I am willing to upgrade my electrical if need be to get all that extra sound in my ears. The thing is, a moderate level of class AB power really doesn't warrant an electrical upgrade anyways. So most of you who aren't competing in SPL are sacrificing SQ for cheap power, and minimal efficiency gains.
> 
> 
> Before I get the the common "I run the new series and my system is clean and sounds great"; there is a huge difference between just being clean and having fidelity. If you didn't know this then you haven't heard a true SQ system.


WOW!!!! although your previous comments are a close second.....Congrats! This is officially the dumb **** comment of the month! (not likely to be out done......well until you say something else of course) and can I start a plea to have a new thread for voting on the dumb **** comment of the month!

Your rant here (like your others) has ZERO validity to anything in this thread. REALLY? Your going to try and compare homes etc... to amps??? WTF!
The thought that you cant have a "true" sq system with the new rockford amps is the absolute dumbest thing yet! Just do the audio world a favor and stop typing. There are few amps I have not run, be it from brax to clif designs..... The rockfords (especially the new power's) have MORE then earned there merits and should not be over looked when amp shopping. Great power, Great size, and Great price/performance.
Knowing your going to continuing to bury your head further up your ass why dont you just explain to all of us NON sq types why or how the rockfords are not of any quality or cant be used in the midst of an sq vehicle? Please....BE REAL ****ING SPECIFIC!


----------



## jimmy2345

envisionelec said:


> Your posts couldn't be more divergent from one to the next. This one makes good sense; while others make none at all. Please get some help.


Thanks for your uneducated opinion....but you know what they say....


----------



## cleansoundz

You didn't answer the previous question by rexroad. The only person who can back up a statement like the one you made earlier would be Garry Stingrray on another professional reviewer who has the professional expertise, equipment and qualifications to back up everything that he says.


----------



## rexroadj

jimmy2345 said:


> Thanks for your uneducated opinion....but you know what they say....


Head VERY VERY Far up ass.... So the engineer is suddenly uneducated now? Interesting?


----------



## jimmy2345

rexroadj said:


> WOW!!!! although your previous comments are a close second.....Congrats! This is officially the dumb **** comment of the month! (not likely to be out done......well until you say something else of course) and can I start a plea to have a new thread for voting on the dumb **** comment of the month!
> 
> Your rant here (like your others) has ZERO validity to anything in this thread. REALLY? Your going to try and compare homes etc... to amps??? WTF!
> The thought that you cant have a "true" sq system with the new rockford amps is the absolute dumbest thing yet! Just do the audio world a favor and stop typing. There are few amps I have not run, be it from brax to clif designs..... The rockfords (especially the new power's) have MORE then earned there merits and should not be over looked when amp shopping. Great power, Great size, and Great price/performance.
> Knowing your going to continuing to bury your head further up your ass why dont you just explain to all of us NON sq types why or how the rockfords are not of any quality or cant be used in the midst of an sq vehicle? Please....BE REAL ****ING SPECIFIC!


Before your panties crawl even further up your ass in a bunch, why don't you take some time to think about what I was arguing. If my thoughts on old school amps were merely nostalgia, then why am I not nostalgic about every other aspect of my life.....or even one other aspect of my life? Thank you.


Lastly, go back and read my posts. I clearly stated that the new Rockfords are clean....they are....they have power....they do. Do they sound better than a Power 300, 650, or 1000? Not even close. Rex...we have had interaction before and we both know you have no clue what fidelity or sonic characteristics even are. Therefore, take your panties up your ass rants somewhere else because nothing in your post added to the conversation.

I probably have to spell it out for you seeing as I am sure you didn't even read the previous posts. No one stated the new Rockfords were ****ty or should be looked over when amp shopping. We are all having a healthy conversation about the differences in sound from yesteryear.

Now please go to the bathroom....remove your panties from your crack.....take a nap....and then come back when your blood pressure settles down.


----------



## Bluliner

envisionelec said:


> These are terrible ideas. Fewer bells and whistles means nothing. Vinyl vs CD - please don't. It's a 10 for 10 for CD at the last "audiophile" test I attended.
> 
> Regulated vs Unregulated - no difference. A wet cell car battery is as stiffly regulated as you're going to get. Anything else is just making up for crappy connections and long runs of wire.
> 
> I've not seen one RF amplifier with a Korean or Chinese house-brand PCB/design inside. It's probably one of the reasons they're still in business. Take it or leave it.


The point I was trying to make is that you can't hear a spec sheet and you should shop with your ears and not with brochures. No one gets a new car system, sits inside, and says "wow, listen to that +/- 1dB freq response!" Listening to music is an experience, it's subjective and I do not know of any way to measure one's experience or predict it with T/S parameters or an amplifier birth sheet. 

That's the romance with audio which gets lost in owner's manuals and on-line shopping. Some products just plain old sound better than others. It could be any number of reasons why or why not. 

You are more familiar with Asian amplifiers than I, but can you blame a person for being a skeptic? It's not unreasonable to question whether or not the $1k+ your spending on audio gear is truly bespoke or badge-engineered when most of the products are made in a communist country. 

And if regulated v. unregulated make no difference in a car environment; why are there regulated amps to begin with?


----------



## ryan s

jimmy2345 said:


> You are using mediocre drivers. You are only as good as your weakest link.


You still haven't said what you use...I don't think you even have anything installed in your car.

Prove me wrong. Pics with a computer/iPod screen in it, with this thread opened in the browser, would convince me.



jimmy2345 said:


> What's good is good. ....no matter how old or new it is.


Perfect!



jimmy2345 said:


> I will tell you why. Because a lot of things were surpassed. Car amplifiers are not one of those things.


Come out from under that "brand new" rock you're living under...



tyroneshoes said:


> Dont get me wrong, I used to run two punch 60s and a punch 100 of the old days. Loved them. The new stuff sounds good too and if you look at the internals, youll see Rockford is doing something different from most manufacturers, certainly pyramid (howd company that even get in here).
> 
> Whats FTFW?
> 
> All I recently did was swap a zapco ref500.1 for a p500.1bd and preferred the rockford. Albeit its a sub amp, I have heard rockford current power models in my friends cars and they are certainly no slouch. Ill take new tech over old tech anyday unless I can get some os Zapco studios which zapco had to underbuild (in comparison) to create the ref line to make it more affordable.
> 
> Plus I just like they way they look. Clean and understated with very nice terminals but heavy as **** due to a huge heatsink.
> 
> Its a nice looking amp. They way amps should look imo


I agree, this series of amp has everything really packed in there but the guts are impressive. Anyone on the "[Country of origin that's not the USA] can't make quality goods" should look around the house. I'm accepting donations of any electronics not made here...I'll even pay shipping to take a Malaysian camera or Chinese iPhone or Taiwanese LCD off your hands! :laugh:

FTFY = Fixed That For You...when someone quotes you and posts that, read your quote in their post...they changed something.

Not trying to start anything, but do you have to advertise your sale threads in every post? Ads get enough exposure in the Classifieds


----------



## rexroadj

jimmy2345 said:


> Before your panties crawl even further up your ass in a bunch, why don't you take some time to think about what I was arguing. If my thoughts on old school amps were merely nostalgia, then why am I not nostalgic about every other aspect of my life.....or even one other aspect of my life? Thank you.
> 
> 
> Lastly, go back and read my posts. I clearly stated that the new Rockfords are clean....they are....they have power....they do. Do they sound better than a Power 300, 650, or 1000? Not even close. Rex...we have had interaction before and we both know you have no clue what fidelity or sonic characteristics even are. Therefore, take your panties up your ass rants somewhere else because nothing in your post added to the conversation.
> 
> I probably have to spell it out for you seeing as I am sure you didn't even read the previous posts. No one stated the new Rockfords were ****ty or should be looked over when amp shopping. We are all having a healthy conversation about the differences in sound from yesteryear.
> 
> Now please go to the bathroom....remove your panties from your crack.....take a nap....and then come back when your blood pressure settles down.


Alright ****stick, lets try this again! Explain how and on what planet the power 300, 650, and 1000 sound better? 
Also please explain how "I" have no clue what fidelity or sonic characteristics are? Please educate me PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! stop running your ****ing mouth and actually "say something"


----------



## ryan s

Take heart, gentlemen...Jimmy's next ban should be permanent.


----------



## jimmy2345

rexroadj said:


> Alright ****stick, lets try this again! Explain how and on what planet the power 300, 650, and 1000 sound better?
> Also please explain how "I" have no clue what fidelity or sonic characteristics are? Please educate me PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! stop running your ****ing mouth and actually "say something"


Was someone else calling you names here because it certainly wasn't me?


----------



## rexroadj

Answer the questions Know it all? Lets hear why the old ones are better, and teach me about fidelity! You, like usual have failed to answer anything, instead you run your mouth about nothing.....Lets see if you can actually "say something"!

Oh, and stop your crying!


----------



## AAAAAAA

They don't sound the same because new amps don't have fidelity, what's fidelity? You're not even SQ enough to know what it is so why bother explaining.

That's as much content as you will get from this jimmy guy 

His train of logic ends at his ears. If his ears told him he was the sexiest women a live, he would then believe it. Ears don't lie...apparently.


----------



## cleansoundz

rexroadj said:


> Alright ****stick, lets try this again! Explain how and on what planet the power 300, 650, and 1000 sound better?
> Also please explain how "I" have no clue what fidelity or sonic characteristics are? Please educate me PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! stop running your ****ing mouth and actually "say something"


As funny as rexroadj's comments are state facts and not opinions why the power 300, 650 and 1000 sound better than today's RF stuff? Even the guys over at the RF forums who exclusively use only RF products and have been doing so for the last 25+ years will disagree with that statement. Where do you get off telling someone who you never met that they do not know what fidelity or sonic characteristics are? WTF are you?


----------



## jimmy2345

ryan s said:


> Take heart, gentlemen...Jimmy's next ban should be permanent.


Seriously, do you people who post this type of junk really think it matters? Do you really? Is this what makes you feel better?


"Jimmy should be banned for having a disagreement about something. Yet, in the same thread there is another guy swearing up a storm and calling vulgar names but he should be praised!!!!"


----------



## tyroneshoes

ryan s said:


> Not trying to start anything, but do you have to advertise your sale threads in every post? Ads get enough exposure in the Classifieds


LOL I was just doing that so he could see the birthsheet and pics. Its sold on ebay anyway. And I dont do that in every post, just posts where people are seeking something I have for sale. Anyway, I removed the link for ya since it bothers you


----------



## rexroadj

jimmy2345 said:


> Seriously, do you people who post this type of junk really think it matters? Do you really? Is this what makes you feel better?
> 
> 
> "Jimmy should be banned for having a disagreement about something. Yet, in the same thread there is another guy swearing up a storm and calling vulgar names but he should be praised!!!!"


Here's the difference (shouldnt have to be explained but.............)
You should be banned, you should have been perma ban a while ago and the reason is that you have NEVER ONCE given a productive statement, provided anything factual, or not purposely started some sort if issue everytime you brilliantly decide to pull out your sticky little keyboard. I get praised (not really? not sure where you get that from?) because I am not the one starting the bs. I am simply not putting up with it. Your a tool and have no purpose being here. Its not a matter of if you will get banned from here. Its just a matter of when. If that means I have to go down with you? SO BE IT! Your useless and I highly recommend you just stop typing on this forum until you can actually prove to be productive. Just for fun, AGAIN I will challenge you to answer any ? that someone on hear has asked of you (post, you making rediculous statements). I will give you a few choices, we dont want to overwhelm you so you can pick just one.....

What EXACTLY makes the older RF better then the new (sounds better to you is not an answer by the way) needs to be a REAL answer!

What is it that I dont understand about fidelity or sonic characteristics?

Can you cut and paste a link to where you have made a single contribution in this forum. Cut/paste the part where the mod temp.banned you does not count, all though it my personall fav. so far


----------



## orakulo

I'd like to see some practical testes form reliable sources comparing new T Line with Zapcos, DLS, ARC (brands that are today what RF was 15 years ago) and even Audison.


----------



## AAAAAAA

rexroadj said:


> What EXACTLY makes the older RF better then the new (sounds better to you is not an answer by the way) needs to be a REAL answer!


Thing is with these kinda guys, that is THE defining answer. Their ears can tell. Dont ask for anything scientific because what they hear is scientifically impossible to measure, it goes "beyond" what one can measure and into only what one's perfectly trained ears can hear.

So yeah it's psychoaccoustics but these guys won't ever get "it".


----------



## tyroneshoes

orakulo said:


> I'd like to see some practical testes form reliable sources comparing new T Line with Zapcos, DLS, ARC (brands that are today what RF was 15 years ago) and even Audison.


Id like to see that useless test as well


----------



## ryan s

jimmy2345 said:


> Seriously, do you people who post this type of junk really think it matters? Do you really? Is this what makes you feel better?
> 
> 
> "Jimmy should be banned for having a disagreement about something. Yet, in the same thread there is another guy swearing up a storm and calling vulgar names but he should be praised!!!!"


Ok, we all know you weren't banned for merely disagreeing. If that was the case, I'd have been banned long ago...right? Meanwhile, you've been on vacation for the last month and you returned like nothing happened and start spouting nonsense as if this time, you won't get banned. That is the point.

I don't praise name calling, and I think it's pretty immature outside of calling a spade a spade. Watch your generalizations.



tyroneshoes said:


> LOL I was just doing that so he could see the birthsheet and pics. Its sold on ebay anyway. And I dont do that in every post, just posts where people are seeking something I have for sale. Anyway, I removed the link for ya since it bothers you


Ahh, don't worry about it man  Pasting the birthsheet in the thread saves clicks...I'm all about embedding since it keeps the thread flowing 

I don't know why they underrated it by 65 watts (4 ohms). It's cool to show more power on a birthsheet, but I would have looked at this amp more closely had I known it was underrated _that _much...


----------



## cleansoundz

jimmy2345 said:


> Seriously, do you people who post this type of junk really think it matters? Do you really? Is this what makes you feel better?
> 
> 
> "Jimmy should be banned for having a disagreement about something. Yet, in the same thread there is another guy swearing up a storm and calling vulgar names but he should be praised!!!!"


I am not sure about be banned but I think now you are talking out the side of your ass. Anytime you have strong convictions about sq, fidelity, etc with no proof then you will be subject to getting dissed online the way you have, plain and simple.


----------



## Bluliner

rexroadj said:


> What EXACTLY makes the older RF better then the new (sounds better to you is not an answer by the way) needs to be a REAL answer!


I know you're not directing this question at me, but it's a question I can easily answer: the x-cards. In my experience with RF product, new and old, I think the x-card equipped amplifiers do a better job. If you take that out of the equation and use an outboard product, such as an Audio Control piece, there's little if any difference. 

I've yet to find a H/U with built in processing that's reasonably priced and sounds good to my ears. So to me, the old RF stuff has more value than the new as I would not need to purchase a separate DSP or x-over to achieve the sound I want. 

Sonically; I've never heard a newer RF amp with a proper DSP or outboard x-over, so my comments/opinions are really what I've heard on soundboards and in customer cars over 5years ago. But I have installed them, felt their lack of heft in my hands, looked at horrific magnet covers of the subs, and sent plenty back for repair. All of that has absolutely ziltch to do with fidelity...but it sure tarnished the value of the product to me. 

What happened to RF? Their brand equity went in the toilet, we can all agree on that. Whether it's an inferior product, skepticism for a Chinese manufacturing, or just rumor...doesn't matter. The equity in the brand took a hit, justifiably or not, after the marriage w/Best Buy. 

How can they recover from that? The product available today may or may not be better than the stuff from 15years ago. What is different is that RF used to have some exclusivity, be American made, and priced to compete with higher end goods. All that has changed and all that adds to value to the product.


----------



## cleansoundz

Bluliner said:


> I know you're not directing this question at me, but it's a question I can easily answer: the x-cards. In my experience with RF product, new and old, I think the x-card equipped amplifiers do a better job. If you take that out of the equation and use an outboard product, such as an Audio Control piece, there's little if any difference.
> 
> I've yet to find a H/U with built in processing that's reasonably priced and sounds good to my ears. So to me, the old RF stuff has more value than the new as I would not need to purchase a separate DSP or x-over to achieve the sound I want.
> 
> Sonically; I've never heard a newer RF amp with a proper DSP or outboard x-over, so my comments/opinions are really what I've heard on soundboards and in customer cars over 5years ago. But I have installed them, felt their lack of heft in my hands, looked at horrific magnet covers of the subs, and sent plenty back for repair. All of that has absolutely ziltch to do with fidelity...but it sure tarnished the value of the product to me.
> 
> What happened to RF? Their brand equity went in the toilet, we can all agree on that. Whether it's an inferior product, skepticism for a Chinese manufacturing, or just rumor...doesn't matter. The equity in the brand took a hit, justifiably or not, after the marriage w/Best Buy.
> 
> How can they recover from that? The product available today may or may not be better than the stuff from 15years ago. What is different is that RF used to have some exclusivity, be American made, and priced to compete with higher end goods. All that has changed and all that adds to value to the product.


THIS is a very intelligent answer right here. THANK YOU


----------



## rexroadj

Bluliner said:


> I know you're not directing this question at me, but it's a question I can easily answer: the x-cards. In my experience with RF product, new and old, I think the x-card equipped amplifiers do a better job. If you take that out of the equation and use an outboard product, such as an Audio Control piece, there's little if any difference.
> 
> I've yet to find a H/U with built in processing that's reasonably priced and sounds good to my ears. So to me, the old RF stuff has more value than the new as I would not need to purchase a separate DSP or x-over to achieve the sound I want.
> 
> Sonically; I've never heard a newer RF amp with a proper DSP or outboard x-over, so my comments/opinions are really what I've heard on soundboards and in customer cars over 5years ago. But I have installed them, felt their lack of heft in my hands, looked at horrific magnet covers of the subs, and sent plenty back for repair. All of that has absolutely ziltch to do with fidelity...but it sure tarnished the value of the product to me.
> 
> What happened to RF? Their brand equity went in the toilet, we can all agree on that. Whether it's an inferior product, skepticism for a Chinese manufacturing, or just rumor...doesn't matter. The equity in the brand took a hit, justifiably or not, after the marriage w/Best Buy.
> 
> How can they recover from that? The product available today may or may not be better than the stuff from 15years ago. What is different is that RF used to have some exclusivity, be American made, and priced to compete with higher end goods. All that has changed and all that adds to value to the product.


Uhhhh No nothing I have said was directed at you.....In case it was not noticed, jimmy666 and I were having some dialog...mostly one sided though 

But being said I completely disagree with most of what you have said (specifically the last two paragraphs).... But, we can do that....right?


----------



## ryan s

Bluliner said:


> What happened to RF? Their brand equity went in the toilet, we can all agree on that. Whether it's an inferior product, skepticism for a Chinese manufacturing, or just rumor...doesn't matter. The equity in the brand took a hit, justifiably or not, after the marriage w/Best Buy.
> 
> How can they recover from that? The product available today may or may not be better than the stuff from 15years ago. What is different is that RF used to have some exclusivity, be American made, and priced to compete with higher end goods. All that has changed and all that adds to value to the product.


Skipping a couple steps in the logic process, your conclusion is that the name on the heatsink means more than what's inside. In this case, Rockford only makes Best Buy-, swap meet-, and Costco-12-pack-quality goods today.

Is this is a fair summation?


----------



## tyroneshoes

ryan s said:


> I don't know why they underrated it by 65 watts (4 ohms). It's cool to show more power on a birthsheet, but I would have looked at this amp more closely had I known it was underrated _that _much...


Or under rating it by 200 watts at 1 ohm? I dont get that. Damn near zuki logic


----------



## ryan s

tyroneshoes said:


> Or under rating it by 200 watts at 1 ohm? I dont get that. Damn near zuki logic


Didn't even notice that :surprised:

Weird weird weird...one would think they would have that spec in HUGE letters on the front.


----------



## Bluliner

rexroadj said:


> Uhhhh No nothing I have said was directed at you.....In case it was not noticed, jimmy666 and I were having some dialog...mostly one sided though


I know. I thought I'd contribute more to the discussion at hand and give the thread a break from the OT stuff



rexroadj said:


> But being said I completely disagree with most of what you have said (specifically the last two paragraphs).... But, we can do that....right?


Absolutely you can disagree with me. I don't take things personal & understand that the "message" can kinda get lost or misinterpreted over a forum. 

So in the spirit of friendly debate, why do you disagree?


----------



## envisionelec

jimmy2345 said:


> Thanks for your uneducated opinion....but you know what they say....



How did we get here? 

*Unsubscribed.*


----------



## envisionelec

Bluliner said:


> The point I was trying to make is that you can't hear a spec sheet and you should shop with your ears and not with brochures.


Well, then make that point by being direct. 



Bluliner said:


> And if regulated v. unregulated make no difference in a car environment; why are there regulated amps to begin with?


They make no difference in any listening environment...except on the test bench. I love them, because of all the wonderful things you can do with a closed loop system...

I wasn't trying to bag on your post, but I was surprised by the statements, scientific or not. They just feed the belief that you can do A/B tests while pushing the buttons yourself.


----------



## Bluliner

ryan s said:


> Skipping a couple steps in the logic process, your conclusion is that the name on the heatsink means more than what's inside. In this case, Rockford only makes Best Buy-, swap meet-, and Costco-12-pack-quality goods today.
> 
> Is this is a fair summation?


5-6yrs ago? That would be a fair summation. From the construction of their Punch series woofers to their flimsy feeling amplifiers, I'd say that would be fair. If one were to pay MAP, what would really set the RF products apart from anything else? They're not exclusive...you can buy them on-line from hundreds of places. They're not made well, as seen with the stick-on magnet cover for their lower/mid-level subs (it's magnetic, I know). And you know what, I never forgot those experiences. 

Today, what has RF offered that changes any of that? The internet is still flooded with wholesale RF gear. Their products probably still have a cheap feel to the. And I wouldn't feel any pride of ownership or sense of exclusivity. And believe it or not; those are important to a lot of people. Who wants exactly what their neighbor has? No, you want something better. 

As it sits, I am unconvinced RF offers anything significantly better than their competition at the given price point.


----------



## tyroneshoes

Could it just possibly be that RF has much more competition these days with brands that are marketed as "audiophile" friendly however they continue to do what they always do, just provide lots of power and subjective info and not get into audiophile snake oil salesman talk about how things sound better? They had a great article comparing the punch amps of yesterday to todays models.

Right here


RF old vs new

Being available at a best buy doesnt help their image of being an "elite" brand of amp however, they also carry Alpine which seems to not be effected by the stigma of Best Buy.

Again, Im only talking about amplifiers, I have really no experience with modern rf speakers.


----------



## Bluliner

tyroneshoes said:


> Being available at a best buy doesnt help their image of being an "elite" brand of amp however, they also carry Alpine which seems to not be effected by the stigma of Best Buy.


Does the image of being "elite" have value? Sure it does. A $200 Timex will tell you what time it is just as well as an $2,000 Omega...but which of those two have a better image, better 'feel', more exclusivity, and give you a pride in ownership?


----------



## tyroneshoes

So its a marketing approach that hurt RF?

Sure for the audiophile/high end/us community, but for the general population who buy their car audio at Best Buy, its just good business. Business approach shouldnt get into the objectiveness of it. Everyone knows the name Rockford. Cash in on that rep (while still making high quality items please). 

But then again I bought a LandRover which is a notorious POS (as I later discovered) for the same reason. I drive a Ford Escape now and its just a better vehicle. Not as "cool" though.

The general population thinks RF is high end. We're the only ones who even know about Audison.


----------



## u4styx

^^^werd


----------



## cleansoundz

I can't speak for the Punch series of amps and woofers but I can speak for the Power series. They have bigger stronger heaksinks and are better made. Not taking away from the quality of the punch and prime series of products.


----------



## cleansoundz

rexroadj said:


> Alright ****stick, lets try this again! Explain how and on what planet the power 300, 650, and 1000 sound better?
> Also please explain how "I" have no clue what fidelity or sonic characteristics are? Please educate me PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! stop running your ****ing mouth and actually "say something"


Funny


----------



## jimmy2345

tyroneshoes said:


> Could it just possibly be that RF has much more competition these days with brands that are marketed as "audiophile" friendly however they continue to do what they always do, just provide lots of power and subjective info and not get into audiophile snake oil salesman talk about how things sound better? They had a great article comparing the punch amps of yesterday to todays models.
> 
> Right here
> 
> 
> RF old vs new
> 
> Being available at a best buy doesnt help their image of being an "elite" brand of amp however, they also carry Alpine which seems to not be effected by the stigma of Best Buy.
> 
> Again, Im only talking about amplifiers, I have really no experience with modern rf speakers.


And then specifically stated what was being compared and sound was not mentioned once.....


----------



## tyroneshoes

Perception is subjective. You cant measure that. Maybe you have something wrong with your hearing, maybe I do?


----------



## ryan s

Bluliner said:


> 5-6yrs ago? That would be a fair summation. From the construction of their Punch series woofers to their flimsy feeling amplifiers, I'd say that would be fair. If one were to pay MAP, what would really set the RF products apart from anything else? They're not exclusive...you can buy them on-line from hundreds of places. They're not made well, as seen with the stick-on magnet cover for their lower/mid-level subs (it's magnetic, I know). And you know what, I never forgot those experiences.
> 
> Today, what has RF offered that changes any of that? The internet is still flooded with wholesale RF gear. Their products probably still have a cheap feel to the. And I wouldn't feel any pride of ownership or sense of exclusivity. And believe it or not; those are important to a lot of people. Who wants exactly what their neighbor has? No, you want something better.
> 
> As it sits, I am unconvinced RF offers anything significantly better than their competition at the given price point.


Everything I have in the car is weird, unique, or from boutique companies...so I get a lot of cachet online and a lot of confused looks by anyone in real life who doesn't belong to this site. Where does prestige or pride end up if only half the people give you props for recognizing good gear or good sound? The more we try to be different, the more we become the same.

But we need to separate "exclusivity" from "better." That's venturing into the "if it costs more, it's probably better" discussion since rarity is proportional to cost but for very certain exceptions. Rare in production sense? Rare in the Craigslist sense? Rare in the online audio community sense?

When it comes down to it, what does it matter? I have pride in owning amps that are from "sellout" brands but were made by designers you can name by name. Who but DIYMA members would know Zapco and Zeff are the same dude? If I'm going to shove an amp under each seat, who cares what's silk screened on it? Hanes underwear is great, but Fruit of the Loom ain't bad. I like playing the underdog--my $0 30 year old camera lens does it just as well as its $500 modern equivalent, for example. I love unique watches, even if none of them cost over $100...and they get constant compliments. Cell phones keep better time, though. Should I say "thanks, but it's no Tag/Cartier/etc"?

The same way, I'd rather use a maligned brand with solid internals than a good brand with so-so guts. Or a brand viewed by the mainstream as good (like Rockford) so it's easier to resell


----------



## AAAAAAA

jimmy2345 said:


> .....so why do I like the older amps? If it were nostalgia, then why don't I like wood paneling in my home, landlines, typewriters, a vehicle I drove as a kid, use tapes, etc.


Wait... so you are saing that in order to be nostalagic about audio, one has to be nostalagic about everything? So one cannot be nostalgic about only one "hobby" for isntance? Doesn't make any sense to me.



> I will tell you why. Because a lot of things were surpassed. Car amplifiers are not one of those things.


Information that points otherwise is everywhere. Less expensive, smaller, more efficient, flat FR, better more reliable assembly techniques ect ect. The list goes on and on. Amplifiers have gotten better just like everything else. Most people can see it exept of course for illogical voodoo beleivers...who rather beleive then know.


----------



## Bluliner

ryan s said:


> Everything I have in the car is weird, unique, or from boutique companies...so I get a lot of cachet online and a lot of confused looks by anyone in real life who doesn't belong to this site. Where does prestige or pride end up if only half the people give you props for recognizing good gear or good sound? The more we try to be different, the more we become the same.
> 
> But we need to separate "exclusivity" from "better." That's venturing into the "if it costs more, it's probably better" discussion since rarity is proportional to cost but for very certain exceptions. Rare in production sense? Rare in the Craigslist sense? Rare in the online audio community sense?
> 
> When it comes down to it, what does it matter? I have pride in owning amps that are from "sellout" brands but were made by designers you can name by name. Who but DIYMA members would know Zapco and Zeff are the same dude? If I'm going to shove an amp under each seat, who cares what's silk screened on it? Hanes underwear is great, but Fruit of the Loom ain't bad. I like playing the underdog--my $0 30 year old camera lens does it just as well as its $500 modern equivalent, for example. I love unique watches, even if none of them cost over $100...and they get constant compliments. Cell phones keep better time, though. Should I say "thanks, but it's no Tag/Cartier/etc"?
> 
> The same way, I'd rather use a maligned brand with solid internals than a good brand with so-so guts. Or a brand viewed by the mainstream as good (like Rockford) so it's easier to resell


As far as Rockford is concerned, they did not protect their brand. 

Bose is a great example of a marginal product, yet, looked at well by the average consumer. You can buy Bose on-line, at a Bose store, at Sam's Club, or a specialty retailer; it's all the same price. The product is simple to use, simple to set up, robustly built, and looks good. It pleases most of the people most of the time. That, from a business standpoint, is a good product. Bose protects their brand through controlling MAP and distribution. Factor in some heavy margins and you realize you'd be foolish not to carry/sell the Bose name. 

Rockford, on the other hand, did the opposite. You can buy RF out of a magazine and price shop online. The price for a T600-2 is $499.99 the same amp on through Amazon is $339.99. If you're a specialty retailer, why would you carry something like this? You wouldn't and the proliferation of cheap RF goods on the net only hurts future business and doesn't really help in the near term either. 

When I was in car audio in the late 90's or so, people would get rid of their old Fosgate system and buy a new one. Fast forward a bit and people were getting rid of their Fosgate system and buying JL or Boston. They thought it was an upgrade. And the many who smoked a Punch series woofer (P1,2,3), what do you think they did? Buy another RF subwoofer? No, they blow up. 

Fast forward another 15 years and the teenager who blew his RF stuff up is now a homeowner, has a career, maybe even married. When they buy a car, they tick the 'premium audio' package. When they buy a TV, they buy speakers (whether a whole system or a simple home theatre in a box), and enjoy music with the convenience of whatever tech will be available. 

Likewise, the guys who had Fosgate systems back in the late 80's & 90's remember 'The Punch'. These guys like their cars with premium audio and they like their home threatre systems. Few are content with just TV speakers or regular audio packages in cars. These people liked "bangin" audio when they were punk teens and they like it now. Only difference? They may have more money now. 

Now, if you're 1st experience with RF is about 5 years ago - was it really special? Did all your friends ohhh and ahhh? How did you feel when you swapped the woofers 3 times? How did you feel when your peers told you, as well as audio shops, that RF is crap and you can get X,Y,Z and have better sound? 

That wouldn't sit to well and you'd remember the experience of owning an inferior product. And when it comes time to tick that mark at the car dealership for "Premium Rockford Fosgate Audio System", you pass. In the back of your mind, if it was junk then it would be junk today. 

That's brand equity. 

It starts by controlling your distribution; too many people are selling brand new RF products way below MAP. This pisses off non-internet sellers with all the price matching and low margins. So you're either a flea-market/internet company -or- you can go back to your core. 

Once upon a time, RF produced some of the finest car audio product. That's their core and it will take years to get back to that. But it starts with distribution and protecting your authorized dealers like Bose does. If RF was smart, they'd focus on OEM premium sound & get into home audio sometime in the future. But they have to change their image first. 

Work in a shop and listen to customers. Very few, if any, aspired to own Rockford equipment or planned on staying with the brand and moving up to a higher price point. They bought RF b/c it was cheap, it was a stop-gap, and they want X,Y,Z when they get the money together. Back in the late 90's? People would put that **** on 6mo layaway and pay whatever they could each week. People WANTED RF in their car b/c they believed it was some of the best car audio you could buy. That won't happen today. 

And if their product isn't bad, well, the competition sure has caught up. Who's fault is that? 

Perception is reality and if people's 1st impression of a RF product isn't a good one; that's gotta change. 

You can laugh at Bose all you want. But from a business & brand equity perspective, they should be envied.


----------



## AAAAAAA

Good points ryanS.

Being exclusive and buying expensive gear is more about the feeling of superiority and saying to ones pears either "hey look I have more cash then you" or "hey look I wasted what little cash I had on these exclusive products that I beleive to be better but might not be" hehehe.

For every amp an exclusive brand sells RF maybe sells 10 (pulled artificail number out of my ass) so if they both made the same exact amp, RF would be able to move more and because of it sell cheeper. Does it meen suddenly the quality is less because so is the price and more people own it? Or does it mean RF can sell it cheeper because they sell more of them?

To put it plainly, if you decided to build a no compromise amp and your budget only allowed you to have 2000 built.... then RF made a no compromise design and had the buying power to have 100 000 built, you think the selling price would be comparable? Must get a lot of discounts when you buy more parts vs fiewer. So you think the more expensive bootique amps that don't get as much discounts on parts has a chance of being better then the RF or simply more expensive because they don't have the buying power RF has?

I would pull the conclusion that RF might be able to have superior products at every level because of it's buying power. So they could have both better product AND sell it cheeper. But of course since it's cheeper in price... people assume it's cheeper in parts. But is it?

Food for thought.


----------



## jimmy2345

AAAAAAA said:


> Wait... so you are saing that in order to be nostalagic about audio, one has to be nostalagic about everything? So one cannot be nostalgic about only one "hobby" for isntance? Doesn't make any sense to me.


Wait....so you are saying for one to enjoy the sound of an older amplifier over a new one it has to be simple nostalgia and nothing about the sound? You are going around in circles here so leave it be.


----------



## atxtrd

Bluliner
"Likewise, the guys who had Fosgate systems back in the late 80's & 90's remember 'The Punch'. These guys like their cars with premium audio and they like their home threatre systems. Few are content with just TV speakers or regular audio packages in cars. These people liked "bangin" audio when they were punk teens and they like it now. Only difference? They may have more money now."

Yup! In the 80's I had a wall of (4) Fosgate 10's in the back of my Camaro running off a single Punch 45. Today I have stuff built by Mr Mantz and Eclipse in my Tundra DC TRD, though I'm not touching the system in my wifes Mercedes e350...she's happy with it so I'll leave well enough alone. My home stuff includes stuff like Parasound, Marantz, Carver and a modded Sony ES CD/SACD player. Why? Because I seek the holy grail of audio and I can afford the toys I want now! I still have a nib Punch 45 in the box as well as a pair of RFR2210's that were built like tanks, by comparison their current stuff is cheap fodder for the masses and lacks that "look what I've got" appeal.

I'll give Bose credit for owning a chunk of the market share but their gear still sucks imo, especially compared to my 1988 vintage Polk SDA's!

How many times have we seen a good audio company get bought up by the corporate monster then go to crap? Also consider that there is more cash in marketing to the "Bubba boom booms" of the world than the handful of folks who are willing to fork over big bucks for higher end gear. I'll pay for the quality stuff as long as the value and performance are there, within reason of course...no $1000 turntable cartridges for me thanks. Much of the car audio marketplace is rebranded crap built by overseas factory/design houses. "Hey Wong, whats that one?" "Cool, we'll put our name on it and sell billions of them...send us 15 shipping containers of 'em".


----------



## Bluliner

AAAAAAA said:


> I would pull the conclusion that RF might be able to have superior products at every level because of it's buying power. So they could have both better product AND sell it cheeper. But of course since it's cheeper in price... people assume it's cheeper in parts. But is it?
> 
> Food for thought.


Car audio is a luxury item. Make no mistake about it...it's a toy of sorts. 

Now let's say the 17 y/o with a RF is now 10 years older, has a condo, and is settled in his career. He'd like some audio for his Lexus; will he buy RF again or will he choose something else b/c he has a few more $$$ in his pocket and his nice car deserves nice gear? 

That's the question. Will the RF buyer today buy RF tomorrow whether it's OEM, aftermarket, or home/whatever? My guess, based on what I have seen/heard from customers when I last worked in 12v? No. 

That's an image problem if you ask me. It'll take more than just competitive products to fix that...


----------



## jimmy2345

atxtrd said:


> Much of the car audio marketplace is rebranded crap built by overseas factory/design houses. "Hey Wong, whats that one?" "Cool, we'll put our name on it and sell billions of them...send us 15 shipping containers of 'em".


Now that is funny....and true.


----------



## tyroneshoes

Bluliner said:


> Car audio is a luxury item. Make no mistake about it...it's a toy of sorts.
> 
> Now let's say the 17 y/o with a RF is now 10 years older, has a condo, and is settled in his career. He'd like some audio for his Lexus; will he buy RF again or will he choose something else b/c he has a few more $$$ in his pocket and his nice car deserves nice gear?
> 
> That's the question. Will the RF buyer today buy RF tomorrow whether it's OEM, aftermarket, or home/whatever? My guess, based on what I have seen/heard from customers when I last worked in 12v? No.
> 
> That's an image problem if you ask me. It'll take more than just competitive products to fix that...


I dont know. When it comes to amps, I do not think Rockford has a bad rep at all. I think theyre solid amps that have kept their quality control for a long time and are keeping up with new tech. Online theyre not that much cheaper than at the store. They have the same marketing approach and dealers as Alpine except theyre mostly known for amps. All the long time brands have had ups and down eras: pioneer, sony, PPI, PG, Kenwood, RF...etc

I have a career and a house and would have problem using a rf amp if they had one that fit my means. The same way I hopped on kenwood's x4r amps even though kenwood was known for making cheap amps. This amp suits my need and the price is right. 

I think if wasnt for JL audio, all dealers would be in trouble. Zapco, JL and obscure small brands are the only companies who have managed to succeed following the "only authorized in specialty shop purchases". Eclipse used to be there at a point. Rockford's moving units being sold at best buy for sure and theyre still making amplifiers that do what amplifiers do well and overbuilding the hell out of them.


----------



## cleansoundz

AAAAAAA said:


> Good points ryanS.
> 
> Being exclusive and buying expensive gear is more about the feeling of superiority and saying to ones pears either "hey look I have more cash then you" or "hey look I wasted what little cash I had on these exclusive products that I beleive to be better but might not be" hehehe.
> 
> For every amp an exclusive brand sells RF maybe sells 10 (pulled artificail number out of my ass) so if they both made the same exact amp, RF would be able to move more and because of it sell cheeper. Does it meen suddenly the quality is less because so is the price and more people own it? Or does it mean RF can sell it cheeper because they sell more of them?
> 
> To put it plainly, if you decided to build a no compromise amp and your budget only allowed you to have 2000 built.... then RF made a no compromise design and had the buying power to have 100 000 built, you think the selling price would be comparable? Must get a lot of discounts when you buy more parts vs fiewer. So you think the more expensive bootique amps that don't get as much discounts on parts has a chance of being better then the RF or simply more expensive because they don't have the buying power RF has?
> 
> I would pull the conclusion that RF might be able to have superior products at every level because of it's buying power. So they could have both better product AND sell it cheeper. But of course since it's cheeper in price... people assume it's cheeper in parts. But is it?
> 
> Food for thought.


Think about this. In the 1980's and 90's there were not many car audio companies as there are now. There was PPI, Linear Power, ADS, RF, MTX, Orion, Zapco and those were the big companies. There were the cheaper brands like Unic, Majestic, Alpine, Sherwood, etc, etc. Today there are more than 100 car audio companies and about 70 of them share buildhouses. RF would be out of business if they didn't keep up to pace with the market. They could have chose the route of being an exclusive brand like Zapco or McIntosh but chose to stay in business by mass producing their products. I agree that their reputation has taken a hit. I love their current power series amps but I am not sure if their reputation can be back to their glory days.

Remember this RF had their entry level line like Punch and then their high quality line such as the Power series. When I think of RF I think of the power series not the Prime or Punch series. I compare the current Power series with that of the 80s and 90s and early 2000s.


----------



## jimmy2345

cleansoundz said:


> Think about this. In the 1980's and 90's there were not many car audio companies as there are now. There was PPI, Linear Power, ADS, RF, MTX, Orion, Zapco and those were the big companies. There were the cheaper brands like Unic, Majestic, Alpine, Sherwood, etc, etc. Today there are more than 100 car audio companies and about 70 of them share buildhouses. RF would be out of business if they didn't keep up to pace with the market. They could have chose the route of being an exclusive brand like Zapco or McIntosh but chose to stay in business by mass producing their products. I agree that their reputation has taken a hit. I love their current power series amps but I am not sure if their reputation can be back to their glory days.
> 
> Remember this RF had their entry level line like Punch and then their high quality line such as the Power series. When I think of RF I think of the power series not the Prime or Punch series. I compare the current Power series with that of the 80s and 90s and early 2000s.


I see your point here. A few things though. There were A LOT of car audio companies in the 90's. You left out a LOT of big names such as Autotek, Hifonics, Audio Art, US Amps, etc. There was just as much competition in my eyes. 

Another thing you have to realize is that even the lower Punch line from back then is still considered high quality and are highly sought after. They really didn't have a **** level like they do today. What separated their lines back then were power ratings and not SQ and actual quality levels. If you wanted high power you went with...well..... the Power series.


----------



## AAAAAAA

jimmy2345 said:


> Wait....so you are saying for one to enjoy the sound of an older amplifier over a new one it has to be simple nostalgia and nothing about the sound? You are going around in circles here so leave it be.


How about you answer my question before venturing into illogical land again?

I never said you couldn't enjoy the sound of old amplifiers. where did I ever mention something sutpid like that? You must have problems reading or in comprehension.


----------



## ryan s

Bluliner said:


> As far as Rockford is concerned, they did not protect their brand.
> 
> Bose is a great example of a marginal product, yet, looked at well by the average consumer. You can buy Bose on-line, at a Bose store, at Sam's Club, or a specialty retailer; it's all the same price. The product is simple to use, simple to set up, robustly built, and looks good. It pleases most of the people most of the time. That, from a business standpoint, is a good product. Bose protects their brand through controlling MAP and distribution. Factor in some heavy margins and you realize you'd be foolish not to carry/sell the Bose name.
> 
> Rockford, on the other hand, did the opposite. You can buy RF out of a magazine and price shop online. The price for a T600-2 is $499.99 the same amp on through Amazon is $339.99. If you're a specialty retailer, why would you carry something like this? You wouldn't and the proliferation of cheap RF goods on the net only hurts future business and doesn't really help in the near term either.
> 
> When I was in car audio in the late 90's or so, people would get rid of their old Fosgate system and buy a new one. Fast forward a bit and people were getting rid of their Fosgate system and buying JL or Boston. They thought it was an upgrade. And the many who smoked a Punch series woofer (P1,2,3), what do you think they did? Buy another RF subwoofer? No, they blow up.
> 
> Fast forward another 15 years and the teenager who blew his RF stuff up is now a homeowner, has a career, maybe even married. When they buy a car, they tick the 'premium audio' package. When they buy a TV, they buy speakers (whether a whole system or a simple home theatre in a box), and enjoy music with the convenience of whatever tech will be available.
> 
> Likewise, the guys who had Fosgate systems back in the late 80's & 90's remember 'The Punch'. These guys like their cars with premium audio and they like their home threatre systems. Few are content with just TV speakers or regular audio packages in cars. These people liked "bangin" audio when they were punk teens and they like it now. Only difference? They may have more money now.
> 
> Now, if you're 1st experience with RF is about 5 years ago - was it really special? Did all your friends ohhh and ahhh? How did you feel when you swapped the woofers 3 times? How did you feel when your peers told you, as well as audio shops, that RF is crap and you can get X,Y,Z and have better sound?
> 
> That wouldn't sit to well and you'd remember the experience of owning an inferior product. And when it comes time to tick that mark at the car dealership for "Premium Rockford Fosgate Audio System", you pass. In the back of your mind, if it was junk then it would be junk today.
> 
> That's brand equity.
> 
> It starts by controlling your distribution; too many people are selling brand new RF products way below MAP. This pisses off non-internet sellers with all the price matching and low margins. So you're either a flea-market/internet company -or- you can go back to your core.
> 
> Once upon a time, RF produced some of the finest car audio product. That's their core and it will take years to get back to that. But it starts with distribution and protecting your authorized dealers like Bose does. If RF was smart, they'd focus on OEM premium sound & get into home audio sometime in the future. But they have to change their image first.
> 
> Work in a shop and listen to customers. Very few, if any, aspired to own Rockford equipment or planned on staying with the brand and moving up to a higher price point. They bought RF b/c it was cheap, it was a stop-gap, and they want X,Y,Z when they get the money together. Back in the late 90's? People would put that **** on 6mo layaway and pay whatever they could each week. People WANTED RF in their car b/c they believed it was some of the best car audio you could buy. That won't happen today.
> 
> And if their product isn't bad, well, the competition sure has caught up. Who's fault is that?
> 
> Perception is reality and if people's 1st impression of a RF product isn't a good one; that's gotta change.
> 
> You can laugh at Bose all you want. But from a business & brand equity perspective, they should be envied.


The logic in this post is so incongruous, I don't know where to start...are we supposed to be pissed at Bose for making ****ty, overpriced products...or are we supposed to envy Bose for making metric ****loads of money and we're not? 

I will comment on one thing, however. Look at what is adapting and surviving on the internet. Just because walking into a shop and only being able to buy x or y product from a brick and mortar store was the thing to do in the 1990s doesn't apply in the 2010s. You could also get mad at Sears for having so many stores instead of a few big ones and a comprehensive catalog...you could order a *house *through the Sears catalog. 

Price shopping is a reality of today. The internet is not going away. Walking into a car audio shop where I live is depressing, and pointless. 

Adapt or fail. And I see a ton of RF gear everywhere I go such as on CL, in pawn shops (2 shelves below an Eclipse 5506 copper-chassis dead head ), on here, ebay. Don't like their stuff, don't buy it. Plenty of people will anyway. Like it or not, RF is still a recognized marque for the vast, _vast _majority of consumers. DIYMA is a niche...DIY'ing car audio is a niche. RF is doing just fine, it seems, without us.



Bluliner said:


> Car audio is a luxury item. Make no mistake about it...it's a toy of sorts.
> 
> Now let's say the 17 y/o with a RF is now 10 years older, has a condo, and is settled in his career. He'd like some audio for his Lexus; will he buy RF again or will he choose something else b/c he has a few more $$$ in his pocket and his nice car deserves nice gear?
> 
> That's the question. Will the RF buyer today buy RF tomorrow whether it's OEM, aftermarket, or home/whatever? My guess, based on what I have seen/heard from customers when I last worked in 12v? No.
> 
> That's an image problem if you ask me. It'll take more than just competitive products to fix that...


27, Lexus, condo, *and *has more money than the average consumer to spend on car audio? Are we in the same country? :laugh:

Let's take the inverse of this argument: Would the Rockford fans 20 years ago have bought the gear if they knew that RF would "sell out" and become a "house brand" in short time?


----------



## Bluliner

ryan s said:


> blah-blah-blah


I can only speak from my experience selling/installing RF products in the late 90's/early 00's and once again in 2005 or so. 

In the late 90's, we moved a lot of RF gear...a lot. Conservatively speaking, amps & subwoofers probably moved somewhere above 10:1 when compared to everything else we carried. 

Punch Z's, the entry level woofer at the time, was a little on the weak side and the XLC's was the step-up. Those were the two woofers I would see sent off to warranty. It didn't happen often, but it happened. The Punch DVC's & later HX2's? I don't remember any blowing up with any frequency and they sounded damn good. Power Series? Damn near indestructible...

The amplifiers I saw come in for warranty 9 times out of 10 came in through the front door (customer install). The few, and I mean few, times I'd have to replace an amp usually something goofy happened. In addition, RF used to have a 3yr warranty. (maybe two? I don't remember exactly)

Fast forward a couple years and I'm back at the same university working part time in the same shop that's pretty much selling the same equipment. 

RF sold less than the other brands combined. Still a lot of product but nowhere near the levels before. The "P-series" subwoofers, in comparison to the older product, would let out the smoke if you looked at it funny. Sending those off to warranty happened way too much. Higher end JL woofers would occasionally lunch their surround, but they kept working. Boston, Alpine, etc. were also quite durable. The RF stuff? Forget it. When I saw I had an appointment to 'check system' I knew without asking someone smoked a RF product. 

The Punch/Power series amps were not much better and no way were they were more durable than the old ones. Not even close. Back in the late 90's, I've never seen a DOA amp from RF. Nor would I see those amps giving up the ghost on anything over 2ohms. New amps? Rated at 1ohm? Ya, right...

In my time there, I only ever had to swap out a JL amp once. ONCE! Why? A couple strands of wire got caught in the threads of a power input and the screw was stuck & couldn't be drilled it. That was an E-series amp too. Besides that, 100% reliability. Boston amps? We didn't sell many but the ones that did sell didn't come back. 1/2 the employees there used Boston amps if that tells you something...

Cheap Alpine/Kenwood/whatever amps were about as you'd expect. Couple problems here & there and performed very well for their given price point. 

But the RF stuff? I'd never own it nor would I push it on a customer if the sales guy is hiding somewhere. Why? B/C I didn't want to yank his system out 2 weeks or 6mo from there. The Power Series amps were huge and did not out-perform the JL slash. The P-series subs sucked while an equally priced JL, Boston, or Alpine didn't. Power Series subs? Too deep, too expensive, and too boomy. They're ridiculous. 

Every installer did the same thing. We recommended to customers product we felt was more durable and performed better. It was never RF stuff. 

Sales guys? They'd sell whatever was spiff'd. Alpine SPX's off a OEM Saturn head unit? No problem... An installer would never do that.

Maybe a lot has changed in the 5 years I've been out of it. But how would I know? The stuff still made in China, has plastic all over it, and can be bought for pennies on the dollar at a number of places. 

RF of old left a good impression on me b/c they earned it. Google "fosgate old vs new" and you'll find many people feel the same way. The new stuff? Any equity they built up was flushed away. I'll buy an old amp before a new one even if they're the same price. As a matter of fact, I recently did exactly that. 

So what has RF done to win by dollars back as well as the many people who feel that the old stuff is better? A couple advertisements? Shiny red boxes? Lower prices? Pulling out of BB to be sold by anyone with a website and room in the garage? 

Fosgate earned this reputation. Whether the guts in the amp are good or not, whether the sub's specs are good or not, none of that matters if your reputation is tarnished. So, besides the obvious (better products), what can RF do to change the reputation they earned for cheap inferior product? 

Telling customers they're stupid, it's better than the old stuff, and it's all in their head is no way to do business unless your goal is to commit bankruptcy fraud. Telling someone they're just being nostalgic and throwing a "birth certificate" in their face isn't going to work either. You can tell someone they're wrong until your blue in the face, you can throw up all the specs you want, and even cut the thing apart to show them how pretty it is. Guess what? All of that is for naught b/c the customer will shop elsewhere and buy something different. In the end, they 'won' anyway...

If the product was that good, it'd sell itself. There would be no reason to sell a $500 amp for around $300 as you'd be taking money out of your pocket. But guess what, it doesn't sell at MAP which is why it's being whored out everywhere. 

RF has a huge image problem. Use google or even search this site and you'll see for yourself. And for every person asking/wondering if the new stuff is as good as the old? There's probably 1000's of others who bought something else instead of asking that question on-line. 

Lots of people have switched from RF to JL when I was in 12v. They were happy with the change. How many people go the other way? I never saw it...


----------



## tyroneshoes

Tell me why throwing a birthsheet that shows the new amps have more power, less distortion are smaller and more efficient does not objectively mean better? It does.

In your microcosm of car audio maybe you had bad experience with RF. I never had an amp fail...ever. Maybe they keep blowing because they have that punch eq and the installers never told them that 18 dbs of boost may be a bad thing sometimes and to be easy on it.

I I dont know when you last picked up an amp but rockfords are pretty damn heavy in comparison the say, a JL xd, whatever that means. Its all aluminum with a glossy plastic face, like jl. 

This is a stupid argument that would only exist on a car audio message board. I get it, you think Rockford's image is tarnished. Who cares. They still make good amps and cater to all levels of car audio fan. Remember the 3sixty? That was a pretty influential piece.


----------



## jimmy2345

tyroneshoes said:


> Tell me why throwing a birthsheet that shows the new amps have more power, less distortion are smaller and more efficient does not objectively mean better? It does.


No matter what anyone tells you; specs do not tell all and sonic fidelity cannot be measured. If you think otherwise, then no one has ever sat you down and proved it to you.


----------



## Bluliner

tyroneshoes said:


> Tell me why throwing a birthsheet that shows the new amps have more power, less distortion are smaller and more efficient does not objectively mean better? It does.


Not really...

If you think an amp that's a 1/2 an inch smaller while having all the above 'birthsheet' specs you so revere being within a few % (for better or WORSE) of something made 15+ years ago is truly innovation and a 'better product'....I got some news for ya. 

If you'd like to compare the modern Power T600-2 with it's great-great-great grand-daddy from back in the day; you'd be shocked. I can scan a birthsheet if you'd like. Power, efficiency, S/N, everything is within a few points despite being tested at 14v instead of 14.4. You call that progress? I don't... I know one amp survived 15yrs...can't say the same with the new one. And I also know the old one will sound better when using the x-overs. Why? My 'microcosm' of working with RF goes back to 96/97ish and I have sold/installed hundreds of RF amps of different generations. 

But if you want to compare birthsheets in a proverbial "mine is bigger than yours", I'll whip it out and lay it on the table. The new 'specs' do not impress me one bit. Want to impress me? Make subs and amps more durable than they used to be and sound better than they used to be. 

What isn't shocking is someone choosing a JL Slash over the new RF. I have zero experience with JL's HD product and haven't even seen them. The slash amps? I remember the rep coming to our shop to show them to us before they were even on sale. 

Here's another thing; did anyone bat an eye when JL released the W6v2? Did anyone ever question whether it was worse than the old W6? Can't say the same with RF can ya? There's a reason for that. 

But sleep well knowing that you have a birthsheet for your amp that has some numbers on it. If you really need a piece of paper to validate you have a good product...you probably have a inferior product. Birthsheets and the old RTTI Power Cube binder were neat selling tools. Back then, a 200w amp was much much more. Now? The birthsheet is kinda pointless as you'll be buying the product on line anyway b/c of the price.

Here's a quote from the link regarding the new RF T600-2 amp;


> As soon as I started the frequency response sweeps, I saw that my hypothesis was correct, this amp is in fact intentionally designed *not to have a flat response*. With boost evident from 20Hz to 200Hz, it's no surprise the amp had a warm, rich tone to it. And on the top end, I found boosted highs from about 2kHz to 15kHz


----------



## cleansoundz

Bluliner said:


> Not really...
> 
> If you think an amp that's a 1/2 an inch smaller while having all the above 'birthsheet' specs you so revere being within a few % (for better or WORSE) of something made 15+ years ago is truly innovation and a 'better product'....I got some news for ya.
> 
> If you'd like to compare the modern Power T600-2 with it's great-great-great grand-daddy from back in the day; you'd be shocked. I can scan a birthsheet if you'd like. Power, efficiency, S/N, everything is within a few points despite being tested at 14v instead of 14.4. You call that progress? I don't... I know one amp survived 15yrs...can't say the same with the new one. And I also know the old one will sound better when using the x-overs. Why? My 'microcosm' of working with RF goes back to 96/97ish and I have sold/installed hundreds of RF amps of different generations.
> 
> But if you want to compare birthsheets in a proverbial "mine is bigger than yours", I'll whip it out and lay it on the table. The new 'specs' do not impress me one bit. Want to impress me? Make subs and amps more durable than they used to be and sound better than they used to be.
> 
> What isn't shocking is someone choosing a JL Slash over the new RF. I have zero experience with JL's HD product and haven't even seen them. The slash amps? I remember the rep coming to our shop to show them to us before they were even on sale.
> 
> Here's another thing; did anyone bat an eye when JL released the W6v2? Did anyone ever question whether it was worse than the old W6? Can't say the same with RF can ya? There's a reason for that.
> 
> But sleep well knowing that you have a birthsheet for your amp that has some numbers on it. If you really need a piece of paper to validate you have a good product...you probably have a inferior product. Birthsheets and the old RTTI Power Cube binder were neat selling tools. Back then, a 200w amp was much much more. Now? The birthsheet is kinda pointless as you'll be buying the product on line anyway b/c of the price.
> 
> Here's a quote from the link regarding the new RF T600-2 amp;


Post the whole article. Not just one sentence. That article was from Gary Stinggay through PASMAG. He also talked about the build quality, s/n ratio, power, etc, etc, etc. 

Be fair and let people read the entire article. Here is a link to that review.
http://www.rockfordfosgate.com/news/articlefiles/255-2007_CAE_T600-2_review.pdf


----------



## cleansoundz

Bluliner said:


> I can only speak from my experience selling/installing RF products in the late 90's/early 00's and once again in 2005 or so.
> 
> In the late 90's, we moved a lot of RF gear...a lot. Conservatively speaking, amps & subwoofers probably moved somewhere above 10:1 when compared to everything else we carried.
> 
> Punch Z's, the entry level woofer at the time, was a little on the weak side and the XLC's was the step-up. Those were the two woofers I would see sent off to warranty. It didn't happen often, but it happened. The Punch DVC's & later HX2's? I don't remember any blowing up with any frequency and they sounded damn good. Power Series? Damn near indestructible...
> 
> The amplifiers I saw come in for warranty 9 times out of 10 came in through the front door (customer install). The few, and I mean few, times I'd have to replace an amp usually something goofy happened. In addition, RF used to have a 3yr warranty. (maybe two? I don't remember exactly)
> 
> Fast forward a couple years and I'm back at the same university working part time in the same shop that's pretty much selling the same equipment.
> 
> RF sold less than the other brands combined. Still a lot of product but nowhere near the levels before. The "P-series" subwoofers, in comparison to the older product, would let out the smoke if you looked at it funny. Sending those off to warranty happened way too much. Higher end JL woofers would occasionally lunch their surround, but they kept working. Boston, Alpine, etc. were also quite durable. The RF stuff? Forget it. When I saw I had an appointment to 'check system' I knew without asking someone smoked a RF product.
> 
> The Punch/Power series amps were not much better and no way were they were more durable than the old ones. Not even close. Back in the late 90's, I've never seen a DOA amp from RF. Nor would I see those amps giving up the ghost on anything over 2ohms. New amps? Rated at 1ohm? Ya, right...
> 
> In my time there, I only ever had to swap out a JL amp once. ONCE! Why? A couple strands of wire got caught in the threads of a power input and the screw was stuck & couldn't be drilled it. That was an E-series amp too. Besides that, 100% reliability. Boston amps? We didn't sell many but the ones that did sell didn't come back. 1/2 the employees there used Boston amps if that tells you something...
> 
> Cheap Alpine/Kenwood/whatever amps were about as you'd expect. Couple problems here & there and performed very well for their given price point.
> 
> But the RF stuff? I'd never own it nor would I push it on a customer if the sales guy is hiding somewhere. Why? B/C I didn't want to yank his system out 2 weeks or 6mo from there. The Power Series amps were huge and did not out-perform the JL slash. The P-series subs sucked while an equally priced JL, Boston, or Alpine didn't. Power Series subs? Too deep, too expensive, and too boomy. They're ridiculous.
> 
> Every installer did the same thing. We recommended to customers product we felt was more durable and performed better. It was never RF stuff.
> 
> Sales guys? They'd sell whatever was spiff'd. Alpine SPX's off a OEM Saturn head unit? No problem... An installer would never do that.
> 
> Maybe a lot has changed in the 5 years I've been out of it. But how would I know? The stuff still made in China, has plastic all over it, and can be bought for pennies on the dollar at a number of places.
> 
> RF of old left a good impression on me b/c they earned it. Google "fosgate old vs new" and you'll find many people feel the same way. The new stuff? Any equity they built up was flushed away. I'll buy an old amp before a new one even if they're the same price. As a matter of fact, I recently did exactly that.
> 
> So what has RF done to win by dollars back as well as the many people who feel that the old stuff is better? A couple advertisements? Shiny red boxes? Lower prices? Pulling out of BB to be sold by anyone with a website and room in the garage?
> 
> Fosgate earned this reputation. Whether the guts in the amp are good or not, whether the sub's specs are good or not, none of that matters if your reputation is tarnished. So, besides the obvious (better products), what can RF do to change the reputation they earned for cheap inferior product?
> 
> Telling customers they're stupid, it's better than the old stuff, and it's all in their head is no way to do business unless your goal is to commit bankruptcy fraud. Telling someone they're just being nostalgic and throwing a "birth certificate" in their face isn't going to work either. You can tell someone they're wrong until your blue in the face, you can throw up all the specs you want, and even cut the thing apart to show them how pretty it is. Guess what? All of that is for naught b/c the customer will shop elsewhere and buy something different. In the end, they 'won' anyway...
> 
> If the product was that good, it'd sell itself. There would be no reason to sell a $500 amp for around $300 as you'd be taking money out of your pocket. But guess what, it doesn't sell at MAP which is why it's being whored out everywhere.
> 
> RF has a huge image problem. Use google or even search this site and you'll see for yourself. And for every person asking/wondering if the new stuff is as good as the old? There's probably 1000's of others who bought something else instead of asking that question on-line.
> 
> Lots of people have switched from RF to JL when I was in 12v. They were happy with the change. How many people go the other way? I never saw it...


Car installers will push a brand on the customer whether they have positive or negative experiences with it. If they don't like RF for whatever reason then they will bash RF products. If they are JL nuthuggers, then they build up JL products. 

I will say this though to be fair. A car installer friend of mine who I respect a lot did tell me that he has installed the old RF stuff and the newer and said that he likes the older stuff. He told me about a year ago "that the older stuff has a different sound to it".


----------



## cleansoundz

jimmy2345 said:


> No matter what anyone tells you; specs do not tell all and sonic fidelity cannot be measured. If you think otherwise, then no one has ever sat you down and proved it to you.


Maybe it can be or not but you are measuring sonic fidelity with your ears which on this forum will be be respected until you can get more evidence and statistics to back up what you say. Teach us all how you measure sonic fidelity. LOL


----------



## ChrisB

jimmy2345 said:


> No matter what anyone tells you; specs do not tell all and sonic fidelity cannot be measured. If you think otherwise, then no one has ever sat you down and proved it to you.


So how does one quantify "sonic fidelity" if it can not be measured? 

Unless one experiences some of these things first hand, in a controlled environment performing a a/b/x test, we can sit here on the internet and play "he said/she said" until the cows come home.


----------



## cleansoundz

ChrisB said:


> So how does one quantify "sonic fidelity" if it can not be measured?
> 
> Unless one experiences some of these things first hand, in a controlled environment performing a a/b/x test, we can sit here on the internet and play "he said/she said" until the cows come home.


Chris, some people will say things not expecting to be called out. Lets see if he answers the question of what sonic fidelity is.


----------



## Bluliner

ChrisB said:


> So how does one quantify "sonic fidelity" if it can not be measured?
> 
> Unless one experiences some of these things first hand, in a controlled environment performing a a/b/x test, we can sit here on the internet and play "he said/she said" until the cows come home.


How would you quantify a good BJ and a bad one? I've had both...but never thought to bring any measuring equipment along. 

What about a good cup of coffee and a bad one? Has anyone done a chemical analysis of what makes Jamaican Blue Mountain coffee taste like heaven and Starbucks taste like a old shoe?

...

Audio, like getting head, is an experience. Some good, some bad, but an experience none the less. When you buy a piece of audio gear and you're looking at your proverbial watch and thinking "come on *****, hurry up" - you're not happy. When you get a new amp and you say "OMG!" - that's a good experience. 

Having your new RF go up in smoke would probably be like ED. Embarrassing, inconvenient, and you'll never talk to that girl again.


----------



## cleansoundz

Bluliner said:


> How would you quantify a good BJ and a bad one? I've had both...but never thought to bring any measuring equipment along.
> 
> What about a good cup of coffee and a bad one? Has anyone done a chemical analysis of what makes Jamaican Blue Mountain coffee taste like heaven and Starbucks taste like a old shoe?
> 
> ...
> 
> Audio, like getting head, is an experience. Some good, some bad, but an experience none the less. When you buy a piece of audio gear and you're looking at your proverbial watch and thinking "come on *****, hurry up" - you're not happy. When you get a new amp and you say "OMG!" - that's a good experience.
> 
> Having your new RF go up in smoke would probably be like ED. Embarrassing, inconvenient, and you'll never talk to that girl again.


If you are buying amps for how they sound then you do not know much about car audio. Speakers matter a whole lot more than the actual amp. If you get 2 amps and put them side by side with the same speakers and a controlled environment chances are you would not hear any differences between both amps. This is provided that there is no equalization and all the variables are the same. Amps should be purchased based on quality of the build, reputation, looks, etc but never how they sound. The amplifier's job is to simply amplify the sound. PERIOD. More attention should be given to the install, speakers, quality of wires, big 3, etc.

As far as sonic fidelity goes, Chris and I were not talking to you. We were asking Jimmy 2345. He keeps on bring up the term sonic fidelity without stating facts to back up what he is saying.

As far as the difference between a good bj and bad bj is a good bj is when the woman doesn't use teeth, inserts the whole p***s into her mouth and then swallows. A bad bj is when the woman uses teeth, is afraid to take it down her throat and does not want to swallow. Also very important is that she doesn't talk while giving the bj. LOL.


----------



## SoulFly

I still have my old P60 from early 90's. i've had a number of their amps and speakers from that era and only a couple of their new stuff. Last year i hooked up that old P60 as its the only oldschool amp i have of them and frankly i'm always dumbfounded when people speak so highly of their old stuff...i mean it can take a beating but what anyones smoking to think their EQ'ed old stuff actually sounded good i'll never know.

The highs especially on them are atrocious, that stupid Card underneath you have to flip to switch from high,Full,Low is utterly retarded, gets so hot you can use it as a heater and it hisses which drives me *****ing insane. Their just OK for subs, but you can tell it has bass boost even though the boost is off. Their other ix amps were the same from what i recall.
They were basically just a typical amp of that era imo except they were way overpriced. I had a kenwood from the 90's too that would trounce it.
Since then i had a 2006 year P600.1 and it ran great for years and still does as my friend has it, barely gets warm and has a more natural bass to it than the oldcrap does. Naturally everyone has horror stories of amps, some have bad experiences, most had poor installs or abused them, whatever, i dont care as i've directly compared that old amp to my newer ones and they sound way cleaner but we all have our opinions, just leave mine alone.

I am curious about their new PBR line of amps though...so tiny and very affordable. Been thinking about getting the 4 channel one. at only 6.75 x 4.5 inches long or whatever and get 75 watts per channel...can't really beat that. My JL isnt much over that and its 20 inches freaking long.


----------



## Darth SQ

cleansoundz said:


> If you are buying amps for how they sound then you do not know much about car audio. Speakers matter a whole lot more than the actual amp. If you get 2 amps and put them side by side with the same speakers and a controlled environment chances are you would not hear any differences between both amps. This is provided that there is no equalization and all the variables are the same. Amps should be purchased based on quality of the build, reputation, looks, etc but never how they sound. The amplifier's job is to simply amplify the sound. PERIOD. More attention should be given to the install, speakers, quality of wires, big 3, etc.
> 
> As far as sonic fidelity goes, Chris and I were not talking to you. We were asking Jimmy 2345. He keeps on bring up the term sonic fidelity without stating facts to back up what he is saying.
> 
> As far as the difference between a good bj and bad bj is a good bj is when the woman doesn't use teeth, inserts the whole p***s into her mouth and then swallows. A bad bj is when the woman uses teeth, is afraid to take it down her throat and does not want to swallow. Also very important is that she doesn't talk while giving the bj. LOL.


I like the teeth part.

BTW, I always thought that a good blow job is when you wake up and it's a woman doing it.
A bad blow job is when you wake up and it's not.

Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## AAAAAAA

Bluliner said:


> How would you quantify a good BJ and a bad one? I've had both...but never thought to bring any measuring equipment along.
> 
> What about a good cup of coffee and a bad one? Has anyone done a chemical analysis of what makes Jamaican Blue Mountain coffee taste like heaven and Starbucks taste like a old shoe?
> 
> ...
> 
> Audio, like getting head, is an experience. Some good, some bad, but an experience none the less. When you buy a piece of audio gear and you're looking at your proverbial watch and thinking "come on *****, hurry up" - you're not happy. When you get a new amp and you say "OMG!" - that's a good experience.
> 
> Having your new RF go up in smoke would probably be like ED. Embarrassing, inconvenient, and you'll never talk to that girl again.



This is one of the major points in psychoaccoustics, emotions during the listening time can affect the "experience", and this is true with a BJ as well or anything (Accept for cofee because it would be easy to chemically anaylse them and see how different or similar they are...same as amplifiers), even if the tecinhque remains(for the BJ), how you feel, will affect your experience. 

Ears *cannot be trusted* because everything can affect your perception... so if your perception changes even though the actual sound doesn't what does this mean? If the measurements say it's the same but your experience isn't, and you know your experience can vary depending on your mood expectations time of day ect ect... was is the most likley conclusion? 

That the difference is IN YOUR HEAD!

Your argument works against you.


----------



## AAAAAAA

jimmy2345 said:


> No matter what anyone tells you; specs do not tell all and sonic fidelity cannot be measured. If you think otherwise, then no one has ever sat you down and proved it to you.


hahahahahahahahahaha all the way until the cows come home.

You are delusional. Everyrhing going into and out of the amp is 100% measurable and quantifiable...not only that but the precision that can be measured is many times more precise then the human ear.


----------



## cleansoundz

PPI-ART COLLECTOR said:


> I like the teeth part.
> 
> BTW, I always thought that a good blow job is when you wake up and it's a woman doing it.
> A bad blow job is when you wake up and it's not.
> 
> Bret
> PPI-ART COLLECTOR


A good woman will know what pleases her man and do it without being asked. Also for a good bj, after the woman swallows she will understand why you do not want to kiss her :laugh:


----------



## atxtrd

cleansoundz said:


> If you are buying amps for how they sound then you do not know much about car audio. Speakers matter a whole lot more than the actual amp. If you get 2 amps and put them side by side with the same speakers and a controlled environment chances are you would not hear any differences between both amps. This is provided that there is no equalization and all the variables are the same. Amps should be purchased based on quality of the build, reputation, looks, etc but never how they sound. The amplifier's job is to simply amplify the sound. PERIOD. More attention should be given to the install, speakers, quality of wires, big 3, etc.
> 
> As far as sonic fidelity goes, Chris and I were not talking to you. We were asking Jimmy 2345. He keeps on bring up the term sonic fidelity without stating facts to back up what he is saying.
> 
> As far as the difference between a good bj and bad bj is a good bj is when the woman doesn't use teeth, inserts the whole p***s into her mouth and then swallows. A bad bj is when the woman uses teeth, is afraid to take it down her throat and does not want to swallow. Also very important is that she doesn't talk while giving the bj. LOL.


I agree with the BJ stuff but would add it helps if she looks up into my eyes with "that" look. And any woman with an ounce of couth should know it's rude to talk with her mouth full.

The amp stuff I disagree with, I traded out my newer Parasound HCA2205 in my HT for my old 2 channel Carver because the Carver sounded better to me, better separation, dynamics and blah blah blah.


----------



## SoulFly

AAAAAAA said:


> Ears *cannot be trusted* because everything can affect your perception...


i definitely agree with this for the most part. Though like i was saying in my previous post, theres no really denying when i hear a hissing sound or turn on pop or bass boost even if it says its off for that matter. 
Those things anyone can hear. Now if those are absent between 2 models then i agree. I think its basically noise and distortion is way obvious, but SQ is really more of a preference.

i can go to a shop and press the switch between 2 sets of speakers and one may sound warmer or the other have more highs but i think those come down to preferences.
I can also tell a huge difference between a 5.1 HT setup in a home vs my car...lol but alot other things comes into play of course besides amp output.


----------



## AAAAAAA

^The point is that people say you can not measure the SQ differences that the ear can hear. And that's BS. In your example, turn on\off pop or hiss is easy to measure as well as hear and pick out in ABX tests


----------



## cleansoundz

AAAAAAA said:


> ^The point is that people say you can not measure the SQ differences that the ear can hear. And that's BS. In your example, turn on\off pop or hiss is easy to measure as well as hear and pick out in ABX tests


Agreed.


----------



## tyroneshoes

I like your bj comparison. Its fun. But unfortunately for you, even if it was a good bj, you wouldnt enjoy it because you are under the impression that she has oral cancer.


----------



## jimmy2345

I wonder why all those old school RF amps sell for so much on the daily on ebay. All the haters (people who are biased because they bought a new RF amp), call this nostaligia. There must be a HELL of a LOT of nostalgic people in this world. Enough to make Rockford a LOT of money if they would just make something that compared to the originals.


If it is so easy to measure and make true SQ and fidelity then why do so many companies struggle at it? Rhetorical....no answer needed.


I have been lucky enough to have the means to take many amps in and out of the same systems over and over again merely to satisfy myself. I can bet not one other person on this forum has done this with more equipment than I (not being conceded...it's just a fact that I have done this on an extreme level), and every time I can here different things within my music. Some of it can be measured, and some of it can't. 

If I were an outsider looking in on this thread, I surely wouldn't take anything to heart that most of the biased people in this thread are stating. I will state again that I don't run Rockford in my personal vehicles, but have used them all and testing almost all at an obsessive level. If I had to choose a Rockford amp....I wouldn't choose old over new.....I would choose a punch 150, or a Power 300, 650, or 1000 over anything they make new.


----------



## tyroneshoes

Dont you remember the 25 to life series? Aimed right at this nostalgic crew.


----------



## cleansoundz

jimmy2345 said:


> I wonder why all those old school RF amps sell for so much on the daily on ebay. All the haters (people who are biased because they bought a new RF amp), call this nostaligia. There must be a HELL of a LOT of nostalgic people in this world. Enough to make Rockford a LOT of money if they would just make something that compared to the originals.
> 
> 
> If it is so easy to measure and make true SQ and fidelity then why do so many companies struggle at it? Rhetorical....no answer needed.
> 
> 
> I have been lucky enough to have the means to take many amps in and out of the same systems over and over again merely to satisfy myself. I can bet not one other person on this forum has done this with more equipment than I (not being conceded...it's just a fact that I have done this on an extreme level), and every time I can here different things within my music. Some of it can be measured, and some of it can't.
> 
> If I were an outsider looking in on this thread, I surely wouldn't take anything to heart that most of the biased people in this thread are stating. I will state again that I don't run Rockford in my personal vehicles, but have used them all and testing almost all at an obsessive level. If I had to choose a Rockford amp....I wouldn't choose old over new.....I would choose a punch 150, or a Power 300, 650, or 1000 over anything they make new.


The old school RF sells for a lot on EBAY because people are stupid enough to buy them. Plain and simple. My favorite RF amp of all-time is the 1997-1998 RF Punch 250.1 Power, no doubt. If I saw it sell for $100 I might buy it because it's a good price. But I wouldn't shell out $200 or $300 for it. A lot of the people purchase those amps for nostalgia, because they are easier to repair and because they have the money to blow on it. The older people get the more set in their ways they become. When people speak of old school this or old school that, they see those times as the good ole days. PERIOD. I love the Punch 250.1 power and tried to run it in my truck for 1 day but the amp got so hot, I could fry eggs on it. I heard that same amp in my buddy's car on 2 15 inch Kickers and thought that s&&t was so damn loud and clear. Then he got in my truck about 2 years ago when I was running 1 RFT10001BD (big one) on 2 RF T1's in a ported box built to specs and said that I blew his system away. Logic behind that is time can skew a person's perceptions.

BTW. Over the last 4 years I have tested about 225+ amps from everything ranging from ZED, Old and new school RF, polk audio, MMATS, MTX, Crossfire, ESX, Lanzar Opti (zed built), etc, etc, etc. You don't know what people on this forum have tested so don't assume that you have done more than them. The average car audio installer who has been in the business for 15+ years non stop can easily outdo you.

Companies have to sell their product and stay in business so for car amplifiers they can say my brand sounds better than his brand and someone will be stupid enough to believe it. Speakers make a bigger difference than amps. I have heard back in the day (1989) Unic (cheap ass) amps in the right kind of install outdo the famed Power 300 which you speak so highly of. Other people on this forum have similiar stories as well.


----------



## tyroneshoes

best amplifier blowjobs

Going with Zapco


----------



## cleansoundz

tyroneshoes said:


> Dont you remember the 25 to life series? Aimed right at this nostalgic crew.


That series flopped. If they reproduced those same amps now but made them as small as their current amps, they would have sold very well. Those amps were wayyy too big.


----------



## atxtrd

AAAAAAA said:


> ^The point is that people say you can not measure the SQ differences that the ear can hear. And that's BS. In your example, turn on\off pop or hiss is easy to measure as well as hear and pick out in ABX tests


Are we talking about 2nd and 3rd order harmonics, that is what gives a piece of gear that "it" factor. Here is a little interview of my former employer, you may not know him but you have heard his work no doubt.

http://www.masterpiecemastering.com/interview.pdf


My best friend and current business partner Kevin was his lead designer for 10years up till 2009, we split off and formed another audio company Burgin McDaniel Design :: Welcome . I consider myself lucky, I have a set of ears that can pick apart the sound of a piece of gear, some of it I was born with and some I aquired from lots of critical listening via very good gear.

Specs and numbers are great but I have learned a valuable lesson in my audio exploits and Rupert said it best. We would be at a show or someplace and a guy would come up raving about the specs of a certain piece of gear...when they were done Rupert would simply ask them "well, how does it sound?"


----------



## tyroneshoes

cleansoundz said:


> That series flopped. If they reproduced those same amps now but made them as small as their current amps, they would have sold very well. Those amps were wayyy too big.


I bet if they used the heatsink design of the 25 to life and the size and internals of the regular punch series, it would be a winner. Call them Punch 60 2.0 or punch 100 a and I bet theyd sell.

I-punch 60

punch 60 nano

I can do this myself RF.


----------



## Bluliner

AAAAAAA said:


> That the difference is IN YOUR HEAD!
> 
> Your argument works against you.


OK, you win...

But wait! I didn't buy 'new' RF amps...I win. 

And go ahead and try to sell/install product like that for a living. If a business strategy is to tell people they're stupid for not believing that your product is good and telling them they're nuts when they don't think it sounds good...well...you won't be in business long. 

Ears win every time. 

Tell me, what does a printout of an amplifier's performance sound like? If you place it on a table, does it sound different that if it was hanging on a wall?

Perception is reality. If your ears say its good...it's good. If the customer is happy and will buy that product again and tell all their friends about it...it's real good.


----------



## tyroneshoes

And if your mind thinks it doesnt sound good prior, so will your ears. Goes both ways.


----------



## Bluliner

tyroneshoes said:


> And if your mind thinks it doesnt sound good prior, so will your ears. Goes both ways.


So, are you saying all the roasted coils and blown electrical bits are a feature? That's clever...

Remembering the what the warranty repair log book looked like was an eye opener for sure.


----------



## schmiddr2

Thank you all for cleaning up the posts and being a little more civil. Remember, people aren't dumb, they are misinformed (assuming you are the correct one).

I hope everyone that has made a post here has read this ----> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...level-matched-amps-head-units-sound-same.html . If you are dead set in your opinion I guess it won't matter, but this has all been discussed before and it is very good information from some smart people.


----------



## Darth SQ

schmiddr2 said:


> Thank you all for cleaning up the posts and being a little more civil. Remember, people aren't dumb, they are misinformed (assuming you are the correct one).
> 
> I hope everyone that has made a post here has read this ----> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...level-matched-amps-head-units-sound-same.html . If you are dead set in your opinion I guess it won't matter, but this has all been discussed before and it is very good information from some smart people.


CHEEZ IT BOYS!
THE COPS!


Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR


----------



## ChrisB

AAAAAAA said:


> This is one of the major points in psychoaccoustics, emotions during the listening time can affect the "experience", and this is true with a BJ as well or anything (Accept for cofee because it would be easy to chemically anaylse them and see how different or similar they are...same as amplifiers), even if the tecinhque remains(for the BJ), how you feel, will affect your experience.
> 
> Ears *cannot be trusted* because everything can affect your perception... so if your perception changes even though the actual sound doesn't what does this mean? If the measurements say it's the same but your experience isn't, and you know your experience can vary depending on your mood expectations time of day ect ect... was is the most likley conclusion?
> 
> That the difference is IN YOUR HEAD!
> 
> Your argument works against you.


I totally agree that ears can NOT be trusted because they are connected to that thing called a brain. For some, the ears are easily tricked into believing what the brain is told. There is plenty of evidence of that in this thread alone!


----------



## jimmy2345

cleansoundz said:


> The old school RF sells for a lot on EBAY because people are stupid enough to buy them. .


Are they? So people who buy old RF gear now have low IQ's as well? Is there a study showing this result? These stupid people sure found a way to make a lot of money to afford such a hobby.


----------



## jimmy2345

ChrisB said:


> I totally agree that ears can NOT be trusted because they are connected to that thing called a brain. For some, the ears are easily tricked into believing what the brain is told. There is plenty of evidence of that in this thread alone!


If it goes one way, then it goes the other. The people who think the newer amps sound better (but haven't even owned the best of Rockford), stand by their specs sheets. That is the brain telling the ears it sounds good.

I would rather sit in a properly built vehicle (let me remind you the main person arguing against my opinion has stated the mediocre brands (at best) of speakers he uses) and swap amps to let my ears decide. Precisely what I have done to form the opinion I have.

It comes down to..... this argument will never end. I have compared close to every amp to hit the market in the past 15-20 years and formed my opinion from what my ears here. That is a rational opinion to me seeing as amps were designed to produce sound your ears can hear. Nothing more.


----------



## cleansoundz

jimmy2345 said:


> Are they? So people who buy old RF gear now have low IQ's as well? Is there a study showing this result? These stupid people sure found a way to make a lot of money to afford such a hobby.


You must be one of those people buying old school RF, that's why you are taking this so personal. In the 1990's Polk Audio was known for their speakers if you are referring to my mediocre speakers. You never sat in my old civic so you are in no position to make any judgments. You are obviously a clown that hasn't backed up a single comment that you have made. Your goal for participating on this thread is to be ignorant, say ignorant things and most of all show all of us how ignorant you are. Again, like everyone else has been asking of you, tell us what your system is, the speakers you use and the car you drive so we can judge you the way you have been judging everyone else. Tell us all non sq people what you GOT. If you are not willing to do that then shut the f%%k up and go to another thread.


----------



## tyroneshoes

I want to know what Jimmy has in his car.

Let's hear it Jimbo


----------



## jimmy2345

cleansoundz said:


> You must be one of those people buying old school RF, that's why you are taking this so personal. In the 1990's Polk Audio was known for their speakers if you are referring to my mediocre speakers. You never sat in my old civic so you are in no position to make any judgments. You are obviously a clown that hasn't backed up a single comment that you have made. Your goal for participating on this thread is to be ignorant, say ignorant things and most of all show all of us how ignorant you are. Again, like everyone else has been asking of you, tell us what your system is, the speakers you use and the car you drive so we can judge you the way you have been judging everyone else. Tell us all non sq people what you GOT. If you are not willing to do that then shut the f%%k up and go to another thread.


If I am being ignorant, then aren't you as well? I haven't called anyone names, yet you just called every person who buys an older amp stupid. I have my opinions based on a HELL of a LOT of experience and testing. I am not sure what you claim to have other than a boner for new Rockford Fosgate amps and a clear bias judging from your avatar. 

From your post a few back, it seems that you are more an SPL guy than an SQ guy to begin with so we may be comparing different views and you may not realize it. I have agreed that the new amps can produce clean power, and have also stated that there is a difference between clean power and SQ (although SQ does need clean power). If you think Polk speakers and new RF is where it's at......then enjoy them.


----------



## jimmy2345

tyroneshoes said:


> I want to know what Jimmy has in his car.
> 
> Let's hear it Jimbo


That's odd? I don't want to know what you have.


----------



## tyroneshoes

I could give you such a nuggie right now Jimmy. Come here ya big lug.

And I force you to know my setup. Try not to scroll your eyes. You cant do it.


----------



## cleansoundz

tyroneshoes said:


> I want to know what Jimmy has in his car.
> 
> Let's hear it Jimbo


useless post.


----------



## cleansoundz

jimmy2345 said:


> If I am being ignorant, then aren't you as well? I haven't called anyone names, yet you just called every person who buys an older amp stupid. I have my opinions based on a HELL of a LOT of experience and testing. I am not sure what you claim to have other than a boner for new Rockford Fosgate amps and a clear bias judging from your avatar.
> 
> From your post a few back, it seems that you are more an SPL guy than an SQ guy to begin with so we may be comparing different views and you may not realize it. I have agreed that the new amps can produce clean power, and have also stated that there is a difference between clean power and SQ (although SQ does need clean power). If you think Polk speakers and new RF is where it's at......then enjoy them.


uncalled for


----------



## Bluliner

Not to break up the circle jerk, but with 30s worth of google & a few clicks I found 

This

and

This

You have the same damn shop selling the same damn amp at 2 vastly different prices. Even worse, they're an 'authorized' dealer per RF.com

This schizophrenic pricing has got to stop if RF wants to remain viable. Do a Google Shopping search and you'll find 39 "sellers" with a $340 price swing. That cannot happen.


----------



## cleansoundz

You don't know if I am an SPL or SQ guy because you have never been in my car.


----------



## tyroneshoes

I had the polk mobile monitors (with the mm3000 tweets) powered by a punch 60dsm in High School oddly enough.

Jimmy, lets get some sushi and talk about your setup.


----------



## cleansoundz

Bluliner said:


> Not to break up the circle jerk, but with 30s worth of google & a few clicks I found
> 
> This
> 
> and
> 
> This
> 
> You have the same damn shop selling the same damn amp at 2 vastly different prices. Even worse, they're an 'authorized' dealer per RF.com
> 
> This schizophrenic pricing has got to stop if RF wants to remain viable. Do a Google Shopping search and you'll find 39 "sellers" with a $340 price swing. That cannot happen.


AGREED


----------



## tyroneshoes

Bluliner said:


> Not to break up the circle jerk, but with 30s worth of google & a few clicks I found
> 
> This
> 
> and
> 
> This
> 
> You have the same damn shop selling the same damn amp at 2 vastly different prices. Even worse, they're an 'authorized' dealer per RF.com
> 
> This schizophrenic pricing has got to stop if RF wants to remain viable. Do a Google Shopping search and you'll find 39 "sellers" with a $340 price swing. That cannot happen.


Amen brother

THIS

has got to 

STOP


----------



## schmiddr2

*This has gone too far off topic and is likely to get worse. CLOSED! Start a new thread if you just want to discuss the difference between hearing SQ and measuring SQ*

Something positive to close on


thehatedguy said:


> Someone please find the Bob Carver article/test that was done in Stereophile magazine (way before marketing ruled the pages). Read it. Digest it. Come back and reread what Jeff has said. See how they compare.
> 
> Stereophile: The Carver Challenge
> 
> carvermk2.com/docs/Carver%20Stereophile%20Challenge.pdf





lycan said:


> yep, that's a great article. EVERYONE should read it.
> 
> What is shocking and astonishing to me, is that the "audio reviewer gurus" know absolutely NOTHING about the most simple, basic principles of electronics and logic. These reviewers were in shock & awe ... _astonished_ and _stunned_ with disbelief ... over this simple principle:
> 
> *If two amplifiers deliver the SAME voltage to a loudspeaker, then the speaker has no choice but to sound the SAME. Furthermore ... that voltage can be measured, and adjusted at will.*
> 
> Absolutely contrary to every religious principle they hold so dear, as guru-audiophile-reviewers.
> 
> I guarantee that, to this very day, they still don't understand this simple principle. "Surely," they are thinking, "there must be some symbiosis or gestalt or communion between an amplifier and a speaker that magically works outside the realm of voltage, outside the realm of electronic study, beyond the realm of logic ... ????"
> 
> LMFAO


----------

