# Alpine PDX amp-really bad for midbass/sub duty?



## corrado (Jun 15, 2005)

guys,

so I have read in various forum claiming that the alpine pdx is not so good for midbass duty.
I was thinking of swaping out my current amps for the alpine pdx, primary reason is their size and hopefully cut down some weight.
so let say I get two pdx 4 ch amp, one for my pair of tweet and midrange. and the other for my pair of midbass and bridge mono for my sub.
my tweet is the mb quart qtd25, midrange is morel cdm88, midbass is the mb quart qsd216 and sub is boston g5124 (12").
was thinking if the second 4 ch amp really cannot make it for the midbass and sub duty, will just bridge the 4 ch for midbass and get another pdx mono amp, the 1000 model for the sub.
so what you guys think?

is it really true that the pdx amp cannot make it for low frequency duty? or is it everyone else claim just becos CA&E review say so without any actual usage exprience?

comment anyone?

thank in advance.


----------



## VaVroom1 (Dec 2, 2005)

BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY !!!


----------



## 03blueSI (Feb 5, 2006)

I am planning on doing the same as you. Once I get them in I will comment on the way they sound. I am sure they probably won;t be as awesome as my pure class A/B setup I had with my DLS A5 and A4, but for the size and the current required to run them, I am looking forward to it.


----------



## corrado (Jun 15, 2005)

great, hope to hear from you soon. tks.

more comment anyone? zfactor?


----------



## zfactor (Oct 19, 2005)

ive listened to tons of amps in my day and i still think to myself how impressive the pdx 4.150 is everytime i listen to mine.. pretty damn amazing what alpine was able to do with these especially since i have yet to hear another "ice" amp that sounds as good... now i run a 4.150 and a 2.150 for my front stage.. whats really strange is my 2.150 does not exhibit the same slight dropout that the 4.150 does not sure why... but i use 2 pdx 1.1000 for sub duty.. these things rock... i have set up a few systems though the way you are describing from a few customers that brought ebay pdx's in to install... i just did one in a 2006 eclipse actually. he is running last years 3 way dyn setup without the passives and a 10" idmax. i have to say the 4.150 is def a brute power wise on the sub very impressive.. while yeah it does have a tiny anomoly in the lower end i dont think with the right setup this would even really be that noticable.. i think you would be fine running them this way..


----------



## corrado (Jun 15, 2005)

tks zfactor.........

hope there is more comment coming........


----------



## hc_TK (Jan 18, 2006)

ive always liked alpine products, and i think the v12 is good amps couse they are cheap. They sound good but i think they make my seas performance a bit to harsh at higher volume. I want to upgrade them and pdx is a strong alternative. good clas a/b amps cost too much with my small wallet. But for the moment ill stick to my v12 amps.


----------



## zfactor (Oct 19, 2005)

pdx is def not as harsh and is warmer than v12's are ive tested both


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

I have played with the 4.150 and 1000.1 (I think the model number of the sub amp) for sometime now in the M45 on my website. The 4.150 is a great amp. Sounds great on the MB Quart PSD Mids in the car and man that little amp has tons of power, But i'm not happy with the 1000. It did not like running at 2 ohms. It was pulling so much current all the lights in the car would almost trun off and it would go into pretection even at low volumes. It forced me to changed the sub out for something else. It work fine at 4 ohms, but it just seems lack low end Compared to the same sub set in a SLK 55 I just done with a JL Audio 500/5 running the same sub with JL Audio XR 6" comps in the front.


----------



## bobditts (Jul 19, 2006)

did you switch out the fuses for slightly higher ones on the 100.1?


----------



## zfactor (Oct 19, 2005)

HMMM i didnt have any issues yet at 2ohms.. any idea what kind of power it was drawing at 2ohms.. ?? are you saying the 1000 lacked when compared to the 500/5?? if so i imagine there is something wrong with that one... there is no way the sub channel on a 500/5 will outperform this amp... did yours blow any of the fuses yet at 2ohms?? one of mine did once but never happend again after that.. i did not replace them with larger ones either


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

We went up about 10 amps I think. It did Samething. It just doesn't like 2 ohms. Also I should haven't to change the fuses to meet the specs of an amp that cost as much as this amp cost the customer.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

zfactor said:


> HMMM i didnt have any issues yet at 2ohms.. any idea what kind of power it was drawing at 2ohms.. ?? are you saying the 1000 lacked when compared to the 500/5?? if so i imagine there is something wrong with that one... there is no way the sub channel on a 500/5 will outperform this amp... did yours blow any of the fuses yet at 2ohms?? one of mine did once but never happend again after that.. i did not replace them with larger ones either


The 500/5 didn't have the output of the 1000.1 not even close, but just has more low end and controlled the sub better. 

I also said something has to be wrong with the amp and he need to return it to the store he bought it at and get a replacement, but once I got it to work at 4 ohms the customer was happy.


----------



## shinjohn (Feb 8, 2006)

Having now listened to the PDX 4.150 for some time now, I didn't notice any issues with running midbasses hard, and full range.

I haven't tried running a sub off it, but personally I wouldn't have qualms about doing it. The PDX is a darn good amp that makes rated power and some. The only issue is whether 300W is enough power for you and your sub. Probably for the Boston, it's OK.


----------



## hc_TK (Jan 18, 2006)

Here-I-Come said:


> But i'm not happy with the 1000. It did not like running at 2 ohms. It was pulling so much current all the lights in the car would almost trun off and it would go into pretection even at low volumes. It forced me to changed the sub out for something else. It work fine at 4 ohms, but it just seems lack low end Compared to the same sub set in a SLK 55 I just done with a JL Audio 500/5 running the same sub with JL Audio XR 6" comps in the front.


Seems to me your dont feed the amp with enough power, and thats why it lack on power. The lower the Hz, the more power it takes. Dimming light is a bad sign. Do you got enough power cables, ground wires, good alternator and batteries? Doesnt sound like the amps fault to me..


----------



## zfactor (Oct 19, 2005)

fyi the 4.150 i have i benched at 498 x 2 bridged... these are def powerhouses....


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

hc_TK said:


> Seems to me your dont feed the amp with enough power, and thats why it lack on power. The lower the Hz, the more power it takes. Dimming light is a bad sign. Do you got enough power cables, ground wires, good alternator and batteries? Doesnt sound like the amps fault to me..


First off the amp makes the same power at 2 or 4 ohms. and yes at 2 it will need more current and ask for more, but it D*** sure shouldn't have been enough to make the light dim the way they were. 

Next I have been doing Car Audio For 14 years and I know as much about Car Audio as anyone around here. I just don't voice my opinion as much as some others or as I could and should. 

The car has 0 gauge power and ground with a Kinket 1800 upfront and 800 in the spare tire area. So don't give me the not enough power bull. And on top of that the amp are suppose to be very efficient. It is something wrong with the plain and simple. Alpine tech support even said it shouldn't have not done draw that much current.

If I sound a little ticked, then yes I'm a little. So ask the question first and await an answer before you make a statement like the last sentence you wrote OK


----------



## newtitan (Mar 7, 2005)

zfactor said:


> fyi the 4.150 i have i benched at 498 x 2 bridged... these are def powerhouses....


goodness is that at 4 ohms?? or 2 ohm stereo


thats rather impressive


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

zfactor said:


> fyi the 4.150 i have i benched at 498 x 2 bridged... these are def powerhouses....



Yes that 4.150 is a amazing amp, but almost 500 x 2 that is crazy for it size.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

Here-I-Come said:


> First off the amp makes the same power at 2 or 4 ohms. and yes at 2 it will need more current and ask for more, but it D*** sure shouldn't have been enough to make the light dim the way they were.
> 
> Next I have been doing Car Audio For 14 years and I know as much about Car Audio as anyone around here. I just don't voice my opinion as much as some others or as I could and should.
> 
> ...


Cool your jets man. He's not American and I'm sure English isn't his native language. Context can easily be lost in that exchange. I'm sure he meant well.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

bassfromspace said:


> Cool your jets man. He's not American and I'm sure English isn't his native language. Context can easily be lost in that exchange. I'm sure he meant well.


Don't worry, my jets are cool. You may be correct or you may not, only he knows how it meant it. And I'm a person who wouldn't jump on someone without someone first pushing me. I still say the last statement could have been dropped. Anyway back to the topic at hand. 

Once more I agree the 4.150 is a little beast and sounds amazing and the midbass sounds great in the M45.


----------



## corrado (Jun 15, 2005)

thanks guys,

dec bonus salary is coming, time for me to go shopping again.


----------



## zfactor (Oct 19, 2005)

that is at 4 ohm bridged to 2 channels


----------



## zfactor (Oct 19, 2005)

btw ca&e tested thiers to almost the same numbers :

"This amplifier is very small and stackable. The “Power Density” name makes perfect sense. At a retail price of $750 and maximum power output of 986 watts, this amp will cost you about 76 cents per watt. I think it’s a good value, and perfect to drive a higher-end 4-speaker system." this was at 4 ohm bridged @ 1% thd


----------



## hc_TK (Jan 18, 2006)

bassfromspace said:


> Cool your jets man. He's not American and I'm sure English isn't his native language. Context can easily be lost in that exchange. I'm sure he meant well.


thanks dude!  Yep, it is hard to help. 
Here-I-Come: im not on this forum enough to know everybody here, so how would i know what you know!? And if you didnt know the big three, my post would be very helpfull to you. And when you know all this why dont you just ignore my post, when the content is worthless to you.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

This may not be the place for me. I'm not some high school boy that want's to argue about Alpine amps. Pardon this 38yr old who actually understands car audio.


----------



## bobditts (Jul 19, 2006)

89grand said:


> This may not be the place for me. I'm not some high school boy that want's to argue about Alpine amps. Pardon this 38yr old who actually understands car audio.


if this is your first post, why did you even sign up if you dont think this place is for you? just curious.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

hc_TK said:


> thanks dude!  Yep, it is hard to help.
> Here-I-Come: im not on this forum enough to know everybody here, so how would i know what you know!? And if you didnt know the big three, my post would be very helpfull to you. And when you know all this why dont you just ignore my post, when the content is worthless to you.


Listen Dude, I have no problem with you. I total agree with you on the big 3 and correct gauge size. All I'm saying is the last statement seems as it was pointing it to the install.  And if you took my post to heart, I will be the first the say I'm Sorry if you took it the wrong way! :blush:



89grand said:


> This may not be the place for me. I'm not some high school boy that want's to argue about Alpine amps. Pardon this 38yr old who actually understands car audio.


Who is agruing? 

By the way, Welcome to one of the BEST Car Audio forum on the net. And you expertise will be welcome. 

But bad first post.


----------



## hc_TK (Jan 18, 2006)

Here-I-Come said:


> By the way, Welcome to one of the BEST Car Audio forum on the net. And you expertise will be welcome.
> 
> But bad first post.


talk about bad first impression. :blush:


----------

