# SQ Sub Amp?



## TxHouse (Nov 7, 2010)

Is there really such a thing as a sound quality subwoofer amp? I know there are differences in the quality of the components used to produce the amplifier.

If there are could you recommend some good affordable amps in the 1000 to 2000 rms range?


----------



## s1monxsayz (Sep 17, 2010)

I see in your sig that you are looking for audison amp. That is SQ amp. For SQ, make sure it's class A/B, not D. D class is efficient, but the SQ suffers a bit. However, if you are going to play it "LOUD", then you probably won't be able to hear that much of a difference. How many ohm are you trying to run your amps at.


----------



## aphexacid (Oct 24, 2009)

My philosophy has always been to never cheap out on amps. There were cheap ****ty amps in the 90's too, and in general car audio was way more expensive back then.

Not even from a, "OMG this $1000 amp sounds better than your $100 piece of crap". Better parts, lower distortion, better build, longer life- for the amp, and your speaker.

If you're gonna go cheap, go cheap all the way around. Dont put a hifonics on an Ultimo, and then cry when it kills it a couple months later.


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

s1monxsayz said:


> I see in your sig that you are looking for audison amp. That is SQ amp. For SQ, make sure it's class A/B, not D. D class is efficient, but the SQ suffers a bit. However, if you are going to play it "LOUD", then you probably won't be able to hear that much of a difference. How many ohm are you trying to run your amps at.


Jesus Christ! Do NOT listen to this ridiculous drivel. If that was the case then the JL HD amps would be ****. 

Anyway to answer the OP's question, no. Buy the brand you are most comfortable with, that fits your budget, that has the power output you want.


----------



## s1monxsayz (Sep 17, 2010)

cubdenno said:


> Jesus Christ! Do NOT listen to this ridiculous drivel. If that was the case then the JL HD amps would be ****.
> 
> Anyway to answer the OP's question, no. Buy the brand you are most comfortable with, that fits your budget, that has the power output you want.


How am I wrong with my statement? Class A or B does not "repackage" the signal like class D. If you think i'm wrong please provide some facts before you point fingers.
Audison is SQ amp, go try one out...


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

The thing with subbass is power. Low bass peaks demand POWER! Yes electronic 808 bass or syth bass of Rap, Rock, Pop music etc can tax a system. But, dynamic music like classical music can smoke a sub system into distortion. Big orchestra hits that contain loud concert bass drum, upright double bass, contrabassoon, Harp, Tuba, Pipe organ, etc can cause a weak sub system to break up and distort on these peaks. *IMO,* a low distortion sub tuned correctly with an efficient 1000 watt class D sub amplifier will outperform a less capable sub not tuned correctly with a less efficient 400 watt class A/B amp. Even the snoby audiophile home audio crowd are using powerful class D and 90% efficient class H designs because it just makes sense for high powered amps.

SO, it really does not make sense to say that class D is not SQ and class A/B is. The TOTAL system will determin that. In the car we are limited by the amount of power we can cleanly supply to the system. If power delivery falls flat then ...the system will clip or go flat because of it.

So, don't get me wrong....A well designed class A/B amp is what we all want. However, many feel that headroom and surface area makes for the BEST bass experience. So many are turing to efficient full-range class D, G/H, switching, etc amps for not only subs but mids and highs as well. It just makes sense in the 1000 watt range to run a class D amp for sub duty as many can not hear a big difference between a well designed class D vs. a class a/b if all else is equal.

For my own system I plan to run a single low distortion 15" IB sub powered by 600 watts. I went with a class G/H amp...that is pretty much the best of both worlds....i.e.....a class D power supply and a class A/B amplification stage.

Again....it takes all factors to determine the final "SQ." Define your goals and find the equipment to get there, then tune it and tune it again!


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

s1monxsayz said:


> How am I wrong with my statement? Class A or B does not "repackage" the signal like class D. If you think i'm wrong please provide some facts before you point fingers.
> Audison is SQ amp, go try one out...


My apologies Simon... but I can turn that around and say provide me with facts that Class AB or A or D is superior to any other amp class sonically within the amps bandwidth if distortion is below audible thresh holds and there is no non- bi-passable eq on the amp. Maybe in the early 90's Class D was in the car audio world was less than well... good, but now days, class D is fine. If it was so bad why would it be doing so well in the Pro audio circuit. 

Saying that one class is better essssque-wise is just silly. I always recommend class D because on the subs, it's just hands down more efficient, and for equal wattage with other classes, takes up less space.

I have listened to Audison. They are a fine amp brand. So is Tru, Genesis etc. Just can't justify the cost. For an amplifier.If you like them and want to pay the money for them fine. I would rather buy a cheaper albeit just as sonically good amp and spend my savings on other things.


----------



## s1monxsayz (Sep 17, 2010)

I was coming from strictly the electric circuit point of view. There are many factors contributing to a good amplifier for a sub. You guys are plugging in so many different variables so the results will end up different. I did mention class d is efficient and you guys agree with class a/b is ideal. I simply made a short statement while you guys had to plug in all these different things into the equation.
$ for $, size for size, class D is better.
Class D is fine, I never said it was bad, but "IDEALY" for SQ, i will still say class A/B is better.


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

Define "SQ"? I think that is where arguments fall flat. We don't all have the same definition of SQ!


----------



## CrackedHead (Nov 22, 2009)

Look at the Bazooka thread in the Hot deals section. Good sub amps there - and they are going for a song..


----------



## CBRworm (Sep 1, 2006)

In my mind, in the sub realm. The best amp you can get, not one that will burn down your car. The sub amp deals with extreme levels of current (at least a good one does), many of them you could weld with - this is not an area to go cheap.

Personally I had bad luck with 2 generations of Class D sub amps cooking themselves, but both of them were alpine. I know, without a doubt, that there are good ones out there. For me - I will stick to A/B for the time being and will pay more to get the same number of watts. 

In my mind, a good SQ sub amp was the old Arc Audio 2500XXK (1050 @ 4ohm, or 2x525 @ 2 ohm) or 1500XXK (1000x1 @1-2 ohm) depending on your needs.


----------



## s1monxsayz (Sep 17, 2010)

My definition of SQ is the signal coming from the headunit is not being reprocessed by the amplifier. But everyone has their own definition. Mine strictly comes from theoretical applications.


----------



## Blancolex300 (Dec 9, 2009)

Zapco C2K 6.0 or 9.0. Those get my votes.


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

SQ sub bass to some might be a single 11" Focal 27KX in a sealed enclosure powered by a *class A/B *Focal Power Symmetric 2300RX amp bridged to 530 watts.

SQ sub bass to another guy might be a couple of 15" JBL W15GTI in an infinite baffle install powered by a *class D* JBL/CROWN BPX2200.1 amp good for about 2400 watts.

*Which is the better "SQ" sub system?* Theoretically speaking....
Generally speaking....this one can't be answered. Only the individual can answer this one.

However, generally speaking we have to say thing about class D amps:



from the Technical Documents of International Rectifier said:


> Highly efficient Class D amplifiers now provide similar performances to conventional Class AB amplifier if key components are carefully selected and the layout takes into account the subtle, yet significant impact of parasitic components. Constant innovations in semiconductor technologies are increasing the use of Class D amplifiers usage due to improvements in higher efficiency, increased power density and better audio performance.


----------



## s1monxsayz (Sep 17, 2010)

WLDock said:


> SQ sub bass to some might be a single 11" Focal 27KX in a sealed enclosure powered by a *class A/B *Focal Power Symmetric 2300RX amp bridged to 530 watts.
> 
> SQ sub bass to another guy might be a couple of 15" JBL W15GTI in an infinite baffle install powered by a *class D* JBL/CROWN BPX2200.1 amp good for about 2400 watts.
> 
> ...


I agree with you. It's up to the individual and everyone has a right to their own opinion.


----------



## TxHouse (Nov 7, 2010)

I want bass that I can feel in my chest, that is tight and accurate. Not the booming bass you hear down the street that sounds like s***. Something sonically controlled, not something that is just out there to be as loud as possible.


----------



## lycan (Dec 20, 2009)

s1monxsayz said:


> My definition of SQ is the signal coming from the headunit is not being reprocessed by the amplifier. But everyone has their own definition. Mine strictly comes from theoretical applications.


my definition of "SQ" is : adequate power, flat frequency response, low noise & distortion.

If all the _alleged_ "atrocities" of Class D amps don't show up in THESE measurements/specifications ... where the hell do they show up?

EDIT : by the way, a Class AB amplifier "splits up" the signal into two halves: the positive, and negative. And it certainly doesn't do a "perfect" job of reconstructing those halves in the output stage! On the other hand, good Class D amps are free from crossover distortion ... and the newer ones arguably perform better, even in the treble, than classic Class AB amps.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

WLDock said:


> SQ sub bass to some might be a single 11" Focal 27KX in a sealed enclosure powered by a *class A/B *Focal Power Symmetric 2300RX amp bridged to 530 watts.
> 
> SQ sub bass to another guy might be a couple of 15" JBL W15GTI in an infinite baffle install powered by a *class D* *JBL/CROWN BPX2200.1* amp good for about 2400 watts.
> 
> ...


Get this ^ one and you will never feel the need to change your subwoofer amp. It gets the job done, has ample power for headroom and control, best thing is the efficiency (there's a thread about it). 

Pops up sometimes on eBay. Have seen them go for as low as $325

Kelvin


----------



## FartinInTheTub (May 25, 2010)

TxHouse said:


> I want bass that I can feel in my chest, that is tight and accurate. Not the booming bass you hear down the street that sounds like s***. Something sonically controlled, not something that is just out there to be as loud as possible.


The bass you're describing will depend more on your enclosure. Although I love the sound of a nicely tuned ported enclosure it will never produce as tight and accurate bass as a well braced, perfectly sealed enclosure. Put 500-700 watts from a good quality amplifier on two tens or twelves sealed and you'll get that bass you speak of. I had a girl riding in my truck the other day who quoted "I feel like it's going to make my heart stop" and "I'm having a hard time speaking because it's making it hard for me to swallow"... that's clean heart pounding low end.

*And no jokes about the swallowing part, that's just too easy*


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

FartinInTheTub said:


> The bass you're describing will depend more on your enclosure. Although I love the sound of a nicely tuned ported enclosure it will never produce as tight and accurate bass as a well braced, perfectly sealed enclosure. Put 500-700 watts from a good quality amplifier on two tens or twelves sealed and you'll get that bass you speak of. I had a girl riding in my truck the other day who quoted "I feel like it's going to make my heart stop" and "I'm having a hard time speaking because it's making it hard for me to swallow"... that's clean heart pounding low end.
> 
> *And no jokes about the swallowing part, that's just too easy*


Sorry man. This is just false. A properly designed ported enclosure will outperform a properly designed sealed enclosure almost every time. The reason people turn to sealed is that they are easier to build, usually smaller, more forgiving than a ported and thanks to a vehicles transfer function, are able to provide low frequencies audibly. 

Actually what he is describing is great midbass. The midbass provides the smack!


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

lycan said:


> my definition of "SQ" is : adequate power, flat frequency response, low noise & distortion.
> 
> If all the _alleged_ "atrocities" of Class D amps don't show up in THESE measurements/specifications ... where the hell do they show up?
> 
> EDIT : by the way, a Class AB amplifier "splits up" the signal into two halves: the positive, and negative. And it certainly doesn't do a "perfect" job of reconstructing those halves in the output stage! On the other hand, good Class D amps are free from crossover distortion ... *and the newer ones arguably perform better, even in the treble, than classic Class AB amps*.


Finally found the post I was looking for... Can you please elaborate on this? 
Read a bit on the "one-cycle sound" technology and was wondering why the freq response goes higher (above 20kHz) at a higher ohm while the opposite is also true when the response drops above 20kHz when used at a lower ohm. 
^ is the above only a byproduct of the technology or this holds true for every design? The switching frequency is set @ 250kHz - on top of that, the switching freq has been syncronized to an external clock frequency set to around 425kHz-440kHz <-- I have no idea what that is but it sure looks awfully high 

Last question, is the treble still more accurate from the "one-cycle sound" tech when compared to a class A amp? 

Thank you for your help, 
Kelvin 

for some more infos 
http://www.powerphysics.com/storage/One_Cycle_Sound_White_Paper_rev6.pdf 
http://www.powerphysics.com/storage/PowerPhysics%20Approach%20to%20Class-D.pdf


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

SQ is not plug and play. Just cause you can afford to install the p-99 with the zapco amps and the focal utopia speakers doesn't mean you have great sq. So these discussions about sq hu's/subs/amps/speakers/wires/ is pointless in the extreme.

SQ is what you dial in with tons of dsp after you learn to hear the difference between 'better' and 'worse', how to use the dsp, where and how to mount your speakers, how to manage reflections and after you have a secure install and decent equipment. 

Threads about sq hu's/amps/subs/speakers based on vintage/topology/brand/price are pointless.


----------



## FartinInTheTub (May 25, 2010)

One of the best amps I've used for subwoofers was my old Arc Audio 2500CXL. that thing was a beast. Miss that amp :mean:


----------

