# The 1Ohm Question: Sound Quality



## Thunderplains (Sep 6, 2009)

I have gone through post after post and on different sites.. I have read various opinions about the sound quality of running a sub @ 1 Ohm verses running it at 4 Ohm. Personally, I ran a test the other night with my sub (Fi Q12 running dual 2 in 1 Ohm config on a Polk PA1200.1 amp) and it sounded damn good.

Is it the question of THD of .05 at 4Ohm verses .1 at 1Ohm? Honestly, I can't tell the difference, nor find any evidence to back it up. I listened to my buddy's setup (Dual 12" Polk 124SR DVC, which he has running at 4Ohm each) and I could not HEAR any difference? 

Also, in looking around here, I see alot of people running 1Ohm 1500+ watts in a SQ system.

So Truth or fiction?


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Its not the THD, its the controlling factor you have. That's why Zed likes 4ohms to the sub. THD is inaudible, but a weak damping factor tends to suck.


----------



## yermolovd (Oct 10, 2005)

If you leave your amp at 1Ohm overnight, the evil gnomes come out of it at night and have intercourse with your subwoofer's voice coil.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

yermolovd said:


> If you leave your amp at 1Ohm overnight, the evil gnomes come out of it at night and have intercourse with your subwoofer's voice coil.


They aren't evil, just misunderstood.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

I think the degrading of sound on subwoofers is blown out of proportion, and so is dampening factor and distortion. I wouldn't go out of my way to run a 1 ohm load, but I wouldn't care much if I had a 1 ohm load. I base the subwoofer impedance by the amp, and number or drivers I use.

For instance, I'd rather run two sub in parallel and get a 1 ohm load, then to wire them in series to get 4...assuming the amp could handle it.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Yes its a small issue, nothing to bicker about for sure. But if an amp can do 4 ohm just as well as it can 1ohm, and it meets your power needs AND it meets the subwoofer's needs, then I say run 4ohm for the subtle benefits in cone control.


----------



## yermolovd (Oct 10, 2005)

gijoe said:


> They aren't evil, just misunderstood.


Maybe so, but there have been numerous reports by the Golden Ear committee that the gnomes have been too hard on the subwoofers and caused them to sound "loose" after the said occurrence.
Hence where this 1Ohm deal is from.


btw OP, I'm sure if you search here, you'll find enough "opinions" on this topic. :surprised:


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

If your electrical system is set-up right and your amp is capable . . . f__k ess que!

Shake it up !!!

Tub Thump wit lil jeezy


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

a$$hole said:


> If your electrical system is set-up right *and* your amp is capable . . . f__k ess que!
> 
> Shake it up !!!
> 
> Tub Thump wit lil jeezy


and the output differance is actually audible.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

fourthmeal said:


> Yes its a small issue, nothing to bicker about for sure. But if an amp can do 4 ohm just as well as it can 1ohm, and it meets your power needs AND it meets the subwoofer's needs, then I say run 4ohm for the subtle benefits in cone control.


Heh, nobody runs at 1 ohm if the amp is "just as well" at 4 ohms. People who run at 1 ohm tend to do so because they double or triple the power.

Also, the damping factor monster has been slain in here for years. Its rotting corpse is stinking up the joint. Basically, it has no bearing on anything.

To the OP, it ain't about SQ. It's about longevity. Running some amps at very low impedances is really pushing things. But other amps can do it just fine. It all depends on how it's designed.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

IDK, I just tend to follow Stephen's opinions because I like his amps. Not a Jesus-like following, but still I pay heed to his advice.

Go figure.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

I like his amps too. Got three of them in my car. 

The problem with his stance, as he's stated it in the manual, is that it's too broad and it's too subjective. He even acknowledges this. He says a 4 dB difference isn't important to him. But it's important to a lot of other people, so it's hard to apply his opinion universally.

He's also not the most unbiased person in the world...


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

MarkZ said:


> I like his amps too. Got three of them in my car.
> 
> The problem with his stance, as he's stated it in the manual, is that it's too broad and it's too subjective. He even acknowledges this. He says a 4 dB difference isn't important to him. But it's important to a lot of other people, so it's hard to apply his opinion universally.
> 
> He's also not the most unbiased person in the world...


Yep, its kinda why I like the guy. His unabashed opinion.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Rofl


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

I really doubt it



chad said:


> Rofl


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

I just hooked my sub up in series and hoped the amp can handle it !


----------



## DoingItTheHardWay (Aug 31, 2009)

I have had amplifiers in the past, particularly some made by Soundstream, that just don't unviel their full potential until driven into 1 ohm or lower loads ...

I can typically hear no audible difference between a sub at 4 ohms and 1 ohms. Damping factor is nonsense in my opinion, especially when the published numbers on such mean nothing ...

Run it at whatever load you have to assuming your sub can handle it. I doubt you'll notice the difference. Your amp might though ...


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

DoingItTheHardWay said:


> I have had amplifiers in the past, particularly some made by Soundstream, that just don't unviel their full potential until driven into 1 ohm or lower loads ...
> 
> Your amp might though ...


Are their amps rated for less than 1 ohm ?


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

I tend to use a 4 ohm load with a Class D amp to keep the distorsion low on my subs. 
Been discussed many times on here that A/B on sub sounds better - that's why I "believe" that I can use my amp for a 1 ohm load if A/B. 
What also sounds better is if your amp is not running out of steam - more power really sounds better for a sub... 

Found a good compromise between power @ 4 ohm, efficiency of Class D: 
JBL BPx2200.1 (coming my way in a week). 

Kelvin


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

subwoofery said:


> that's why I "believe" that I can use my amp for a 1 ohm load if A/B.


If it is not rated for 1 ohm you'll figure it out


----------



## jaysalti (Apr 15, 2009)

Glad to see this discussion b\c I've been pondering running the mag at 1 ohm for 1000w or 4 @ 510w.


----------



## DoingItTheHardWay (Aug 31, 2009)

a$$hole said:


> Are their amps rated for less than 1 ohm ?


Of course, some of those old school SS amps could drive 0.25 ohm stereo loads ...


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

DoingItTheHardWay said:


> Of course, some of those old school SS amps could drive 0.25 ohm stereo loads ...


OK , you're set then 

I'm running a new class D [ SAZ1500D ], @ 2 ohms.


----------



## Thunderplains (Sep 6, 2009)

It's not easy finding an amp that runs at 1000w at 4ohms without needing a electrical system upgrade. Any suggestions?


----------



## ItalynStylion (May 3, 2008)

I ran my 4 Tang Band 6.5" subs at 1ohm as long as I had them and they sounded great.

I wouldn't avoid 1ohm loads if the amp can handle them.

In my case, the JL HD900/5 I believe will do 1 or 4ohms on the sub channel. I'll be running it at 4 because the power output will be the same.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

Thunderplains said:


> It's not easy finding an amp that runs at 1000w at 4ohms without needing a electrical system upgrade. Any suggestions?


I'm confused, current draw is _probably_ worse at 1 ohm versus 4 ohms (per wattage output). Why would the capabilities of the charging system matter here?


----------



## DoingItTheHardWay (Aug 31, 2009)

t3sn4f2 said:


> I'm confused, current draw is _probably_ worse at 1 ohm versus 4 ohms (per wattage output). Why would the capabilities of the charging system matter here?


Hmmm, less resistance, more ability to draw current, lower impedance = higher current draw, no?


----------



## freemind (Sep 11, 2008)

Oh crap, I've been running my 8 ohm subs in series!

Am I gonna die dad?


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

DoingItTheHardWay said:


> Hmmm, less resistance, more ability to draw current, lower impedance = higher current draw, no?


Naw, a watt is a unit power. Power = Voltage x Current. A 1-4 ohms rated amp will TYPICALLY be more efficient at the higher the impedance and have less _arguably_ inaudible distortion. Notice how some companies that have those types of amps list efficiency ratings at 4 ohms.

Sundown Audio - SAZ-1000D


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

Thunderplains said:


> It's not easy finding an amp that runs at 1000w at 4ohms without needing a electrical system upgrade. Any suggestions?


Zed Kronos. Knock yourself out.


----------



## hcbassplay (Jun 19, 2005)

Well, lack of power is far worse than distortion or lesser damping factor IMO.

That said, I'm not a big fan of 1ohm due to heat/stress/efficiency issues, but it really depends on the amp. For some amps it's a breeze, others, it's asking for trouble.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

hcbassplay said:


> Well, lack of power is far worse than distortion or lesser damping factor IMO.
> 
> That said, I'm not a big fan of 1ohm due to heat/stress/efficiency issues, but it really depends on the amp. For some amps it's a breeze, others, it's asking for trouble.


I have to disagree, the number of people that have taken a dual coil woofer at 2 ohms per coil and gone form 1 to 4 have noticed a significant amount of improvement is a staggering amount, sans a few... Tspence..... Hell, I went from 2 ohms to 8 ohms on a PA system and blind users said WOW, did you add more power?

Nope, theoretically reduced it.......


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

chad said:


> I have to disagree, the number of people that have taken a dual coil woofer at 2 ohms per coil and gone form 1 to 4 have noticed a significant amount of improvementis a stagger ing amount, sans a few... Tspence..... Hell, I went from 2 ohms to 8 ohms on a PA system and blind users said WOW, did you add more power?
> 
> Nope, theoretically reduced it.......


What's the woofer and how much was power compression kicking you in the ass?


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

JBL 2241H's

Crown ODEP was kicking our ass.

I eventually did move up in power with that in mind with great results at 4 ohms


----------



## GregU (Dec 24, 2008)

I looked in the poll list and couldn't find 8ohms This is a DIY site, 8 ohms is pretty common


----------



## hcbassplay (Jun 19, 2005)

chad said:


> I have to disagree, the number of people that have taken a dual coil woofer at 2 ohms per coil and gone form 1 to 4 have noticed a significant amount of improvement is a staggering amount, sans a few... Tspence..... Hell, I went from 2 ohms to 8 ohms on a PA system and blind users said WOW, did you add more power?
> 
> Nope, theoretically reduced it.......


As I said in the quoted post, really depends on the amp.


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

t3sn4f2 said:


> Naw, a watt is a unit power. Power = Voltage x Current. A 1-4 ohms rated amp will TYPICALLY be more efficient at the higher the impedance and have less _arguably_ inaudible distortion. Notice how some companies that have those types of amps list efficiency ratings at 4 ohms.
> 
> Sundown Audio - SAZ-1000D


SAZ-1500D POWER TESTING - SSA Car Audio Forum

78% efficient at 1 ohm.

Not bad and good info.



Still when you consider Impedance rise with a 1 ohm dcr load,I was hitting 3 ohms with tones at the lowest measured resistance. I have measured the same sub wired series and I was in the 10 ohm range with tones. So give me the 1 ohm load.
We have a chart recorder that I intend to use to see what actually happens with music, noise etc. I would really like to see what happens in the real world with power output


----------



## freemind (Sep 11, 2008)

Us 2 ohm guys are catching up quickly!


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

hcbassplay said:


> As I said in the quoted post, really depends on the amp.


I'm not saying that there are amps that cannot play at 1 ohm, I'm saying that outside of power output and ONLY outside power output I'll bet a 6 pack that they perform better, run cooler, and last longer in all other facets, bar none.

And once you start splitting hairs like that it's just not worth it because the gains become minimal and the risks become much greater.

Bar none, people look way too much at power numbers with hard-ons and forget what they are really looking at, amplifiers are NOT a constant voltage source.


----------



## cleansoundz (May 14, 2008)

I am a 2 ohm guy. Always have been always will be. The differences between sound quality at 4 ohms and 1 ohm are slight if any. In rap, reggae and hard rock the differences will be hard to notice. On other kinds of music where more sq is needed then the differences between 4 ohms and 1 ohm can be heard.


----------



## hcbassplay (Jun 19, 2005)

chad said:


> I'm not saying that there are amps that cannot play at 1 ohm, I'm saying that outside of power output and ONLY outside power output I'll bet a 6 pack that they perform better, run cooler, and last longer in all other facets, bar none.
> 
> And once you start splitting hairs like that it's just not worth it because the gains become minimal and the risks become much greater.
> 
> Bar none, *people look way too much at power numbers with hard-ons and *forget what they are really looking at, amplifiers are NOT a constant voltage source.


I completely agree with you, all I was saying is that in some amps, the performance difference might be measurable, but not audible.

As for the bolded part, I double agree with you there. If people would stop trying to tune-by-numbers (very similar to paint-by-numbers IMO), and just start experimenting with their systems, they'd be surprised what they could get out of them.

I've fixed quite a few horrible sounding setups by unbridging amps myself.


----------



## Ziggy (Nov 29, 2007)

I'm at a 2ohm load on the sub channel now. For the strain on the electrical system or on the amp, I won't ever be going back to 1ohm... 
I also wound up @2ohm, because I had an extra 13Ov sub in Dual 4VC laying around.
For me, running sub at 2ohm or 4ohm is better than 1ohm because: the amp runs cooler, and there is less dimming = longer amp life, alt life, battery life.


----------



## cleansoundz (May 14, 2008)

Ziggy said:


> I'm at a 2ohm load on the sub channel now. For the strain on the electrical system or on the amp, I won't ever be going back to 1ohm...
> I also wound up @2ohm, because I had an extra 13Ov sub in Dual 4VC laying around.
> For me, running sub at 2ohm or 4ohm is better than 1ohm because: the amp runs cooler, and there is less dimming = longer amp life, alt life, battery life.


I'm with you on that one. I will never go back to 1 ohm again.


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

OK, less dimming means you are drawing less current and therefore outputting less power. That would explain the dimming difference between the difference between 4,2,1 ohm loads. 

Obviously if your amp puts out the same power at each load like JL's do the dimming will be the same.

The current draw should be the same for a 1000 watt amp whether the thing puts out a 1000 watts at 4 ohm or 1 ohm as long as the efficiencies are the same.

Heat can be an issue. I play mine hard and it has never been hot.


----------



## niko084 (Dec 16, 2009)

While I understand the ability for it to change the sound...

I have never once noticed myself able to depict the differences.

But being I understand how it "can, maybe, could, possibly" happen "technically" lol.... I generally use Class A/B amps for my subs and generally run then 4ohm... That's more because generally I find the same companies lines of Class A/B vs Class D amps to be made to different levels of quality.


----------



## rc10mike (Mar 27, 2008)

My story..

Had a Rockford Power 1000 (5ch) running two Punch HX2 D4 12's @ 1 ohm. Just out of pure curiosity, I wired them to 4 ohms...

Im not even going to try and explain the difference. All I can say was 4 ohms sounded much better. Granted, I couldnt push them as loud.


----------



## Acceleratorz (Aug 22, 2010)

I'm running 8 ohm lol ))


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

Damping factor is hogwash, pure and simple. There is no appreciable cone control provided by low amplifier output impedance.

Here's the short story. The preposterous arguement for damping caused by amplifiers is based on the idea that the output impedance of the amplifier causes the energy stored in the inductive component of the moving speaker to be dissipated more quickly, because the current flow is greater from the speaker to the amplifier if the amplifier has a lower impedance. The problem with that BS theory is that the speaker's DCR is in series with the amplifier's output impedance and is always MUCH greater than the output impedance of the amplifier. Therefore, the speaker's DCR is what controls damping in the electrical circuit and not the amplifier. 

Here's the best explanation I've ever read on the subject:

http://www.diyspeakers.net/Articles/Richard Pierce DAMPING FACTOR.pdf


----------



## UT-Driven (Sep 16, 2010)

Thunderplains said:


> It's not easy finding an amp that runs at 1000w at 4ohms without needing a electrical system upgrade. Any suggestions?


I am going to be running a JL XD 400/4 for my components and an Audison LRx 1.400 at 1 ohm for my sub. I am hoping that I can avoid an upgrade as well!

Doug


----------



## mSaLL150 (Aug 14, 2008)

Been running 1 Ohm for a long while with no problems on my iA7, even in 100 degree summers for hours. If you have an amp capable, no problem.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

I'm glad I Came across this thread. It reminded me that my 12W6s have been at 8 ohms (or whatever the highest config is) for over a year now. I changed them while doing some troubleshooting and forgot about it. I may just leave it with my new setup of a single W6 in the IB config since I'm excursion limited as is..


----------



## spmpdr (Nov 5, 2009)

yermolovd said:


> If you leave your amp at 1Ohm overnight, the evil gnomes come out of it at night and have intercourse with your subwoofer's voice coil.




Thats my new sig!!!


----------



## dtm337 (May 28, 2009)

i just swapped my subs from 1 to 4 ohms and noticed a few things...

1 output suffered but my gains were off on the amp ,,a little twist on the line driver and .plenty of power .. im using a rainbow dm2000 

2 the bass sounded much cleaner ..esp at lower volumes 
3 i guess just more musical ... 
4 the remote gain control does its job now , its not like a on off switch anymore

thats just my 2 cents .


----------



## jbreddawg (Dec 28, 2009)

Well I'll have this delima in the very near future . I have a Massive Audio N3 amp that can run at 1 ohm. I will be using a pair of 12's so I surmise if I get a pair of dual 4 ohm subs I can try one ohm and four ohm and see what sounds better


----------



## dh8009 (Jul 19, 2010)

Question: So if sound quality is better at 4 ohms than 1, would it be better to use three Arc Audio or IDQ 10's than something like two IDMax 10's. The Arc's have a lower power handling than the IDMax's and the extra woofer may help get some of the volume back.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

dh8009 said:


> Question: So if sound quality is better at 4 ohms than 1, would it be better to use three Arc Audio or IDQ 10's than something like two IDMax 10's. The Arc's have a lower power handling than the IDMax's and the extra woofer may help get some of the volume back.


Not enough info. What config for the Arc 10", D2 or D4? Config for the IDQ 10"? Final load? What amplifier are you gonna use to push those subs? 

Kelvin


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

Thunderplains said:


> I have gone through post after post and on different sites.. I have read various opinions about the sound quality of running a sub @ 1 Ohm verses running it at 4 Ohm. Personally, I ran a test the other night with my sub (Fi Q12 running dual 2 in 1 Ohm config on a Polk PA1200.1 amp) and it sounded damn good.
> 
> Is it the question of THD of .05 at 4Ohm verses .1 at 1Ohm? Honestly, I can't tell the difference, nor find any evidence to back it up. I listened to my buddy's setup (Dual 12" Polk 124SR DVC, which he has running at 4Ohm each) and I could not HEAR any difference?
> 
> ...


The motor of a subwoofer produces distortion that's many MANY orders of magnitude higher than the distortion produced by the amp that's driving it. The only time I ever worry about the load that I'm running is if the amp starts shutting down.

When it comes to distortion I focus on the enclosure and the woofer that's in it, not the amp that's powering it.


----------



## dh8009 (Jul 19, 2010)

subwoofery said:


> Not enough info. What config for the Arc 10", D2 or D4? Config for the IDQ 10"? Final load? What amplifier are you gonna use to push those subs?
> 
> Kelvin


Oh I'm sorry. It was kind of a general question. My thinking was that the Arc and IDQ subs have a lower power handling so it would be easier to find an amp that could produce enough wattage at 4 ohms to run these subs where as an amp to run the IDMax subs would more than likely be ran at lower ohms to produce enough wattage.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

dh8009 said:


> Oh I'm sorry. It was kind of a general question. My thinking was that the Arc and IDQ subs have a lower power handling so it would be easier to find an amp that could produce enough wattage at 4 ohms to run these subs where as an amp to run the IDMax subs would more than likely be ran at lower ohms to produce enough wattage.


Ok my answer has nothing to do with 4 ohm or 1 ohm load at the amplifier. 
If I have 1000rms for subs - I ALWAYS choose 2 subs over 1 ; in your case I'd take 3 Arcs over the 2 IDQs. 
Why? 3 motors working instead of 2, lower power compression and lower distorsion due to the use of less Xmax. 

Kelvin


----------



## dh8009 (Jul 19, 2010)

subwoofery said:


> Ok my answer has nothing to do with 4 ohm or 1 ohm load at the amplifier.
> If I have 1000rms for subs - I ALWAYS choose 2 subs over 1 ; in your case I'd take 3 Arcs over the 2 IDQs.
> Why? 3 motors working instead of 2, lower power compression and lower distorsion due to the use of less Xmax.
> 
> Kelvin


Okay that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying that. There's alot that goes into this stuff. I was just thinking about the IDMax having stronger motors and more excursion than the IDQ and Arc's. I was making sure the extra woofer would make up for the difference and still have the sound quality advantage. But in all that I confused the ohm debate also.


----------



## chithead (Mar 19, 2008)

Guess I'll be testing this out myself here in the next few weeks.


----------



## draft6969 (Aug 4, 2009)

ok well here is my question. what if the amp is specifically made for a certain load? I have a MMATS dhc1400.05 which is made to run at .5 ohm. would sound quality suffer when the amp is made for a low load? I can go .5 or 2 ohm


----------



## jimmy2345 (Jul 12, 2010)

draft6969 said:


> ok well here is my question. what if the amp is specifically made for a certain load? I have a MMATS dhc1400.05 which is made to run at .5 ohm. would sound quality suffer when the amp is made for a low load? I can go .5 or 2 ohm



No, it doesn't matter if it was made to run that load.....it will still sound better at 4 ohms, or higher, than 1 ohm.


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

jimmy2345 said:


> No, it doesn't matter if it was made to run that load.....it will still sound better at 4 ohms, or higher, than 1 ohm.


The thing is, odds are you are not going to tell a difference. I tried it. Ran my sub at 4 ohms DCR. Ran it at 1 ohm DCR. honestly at up to 120 db, I couldn't tell a difference. Amps used was a Sundown SAZ1500D and a JBL 14001 at 4 ohms. It was a pain in the ass to match them so set the output based on spl.


----------



## Chaos (Oct 27, 2005)

This topic is one of the few examples that legitimately challenges the concept that "more power" is always better. *All other things being equal*, that is certainly still just as true as it always has been, at least from the perspective of potential headroom in the system.

However, there is plenty of anecdotal evidence that running a typical amp at higher nominal impedance (and therefore, less output) actually improves essque in a lot of cases. This may be an oversimplification, but basically, if any given power supply isn't constantly being pushed to its limits, the amp will sound better and last longer.

Obviously, individual results will vary depending on specific systems, but it has long since been established that one accepted method of improving overall performance is to upgrade to an amp that just plain makes more power, rather than trying to squeeze every last watt out of a smaller amp. 

In many cases, that holds true even if it doesn't seem sensible at first. For example, if you were to compare one smaller amp that can make X number of watts into 1 ohm vs. an amp that can make the "same" amount of power at 4 ohms, the larger amp is going to have a lot more headroom and spend less time clipping than the first amp, even though they are both providing the same amount of juice on paper.

That being the case then, does that mean that running the smaller amp into a higher impedance will be better or worse? That's an awfully subjective question to answer, but if your goal is to lower distortion and you don't mind sacrificing a few deebees in the process, then your subs (or any other speaker) will probably sound better in the end.


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

Chaos said:


> This topic is one of the few examples that legitimately challenges the concept that "more power" is always better. *All other things being equal*, that is certainly still just as true as it always has been, at least from the perspective of potential headroom in the system.
> 
> However, there is plenty of anecdotal evidence that running a typical amp at higher nominal impedance (and therefore, less output) actually improves essque in a lot of cases. This may be an oversimplification, but basically, if any given power supply isn't constantly being pushed to its limits, the amp will sound better and last longer.
> 
> ...


I think people need to realize that there are benefits to both sides of the coin as well as drawbacks. the first thing people have to realize is that running low impedance loads on an amplifier does in fact tax the amplifier more. Distortion levels do go up. efficiency does go down. Now on a class D amp, that design does tend to be more friendly to low impedance loads. Again though those loads will cause the amp to supply more AC current which causes more heat which lowers efficiency and distortion levels do rise. Now if those distortion levels are below audibility and the amp has enough heatsink area to deal with the added heat so that reliability is not affected then I say run the low impedance scheme. because the flip side to this is that to make the same power in a higher impedance, the amplifier is usually quite a bit bigger. And remember that generally speaking if the efficiencies are the same the DC power requirements are also going to be the same running equal power to differing impedances (1000 [email protected] 4 or 1 ohm requires the same DC volts/amps). Also running amps that supply the same power but at different impedance's (again 1000 [email protected] vs 1000 [email protected] ohm) the 4 ohm amp does not necessarily have more head room. 

Just adding more power by buying a bigger amp will work. Just remember that you will suffer what I believe are more audible effects like power compression. This is what I truly think people "hear" when running high vs low impedances on the same amp. more power always translates to more heat on the motor of the subwoofer. More heat means you get more power compression. the resistance rises fast as the coil/motor heats up.


----------



## Chaos (Oct 27, 2005)

cubdenno said:


> I think people need to realize that there are benefits to both sides of the coin as well as drawbacks. the first thing people have to realize is that running low impedance loads on an amplifier does in fact tax the amplifier more. Distortion levels do go up. efficiency does go down. Now on a class D amp, that design does tend to be more friendly to low impedance loads. Again though those loads will cause the amp to supply more AC current which causes more heat which lowers efficiency and distortion levels do rise. Now if those distortion levels are below audibility and the amp has enough heatsink area to deal with the added heat so that reliability is not affected then I say run the low impedance scheme. because the flip side to this is that to make the same power in a higher impedance, the amplifier is usually quite a bit bigger. And remember that generally speaking if the efficiencies are the same the DC power requirements are also going to be the same running equal power to differing impedances (1000 [email protected] 4 or 1 ohm requires the same DC volts/amps). Also running amps that supply the same power but at different impedance's (again 1000 [email protected] vs 1000 [email protected] ohm) the 4 ohm amp does not necessarily have more head room.
> 
> Just adding more power by buying a bigger amp will work. Just remember that you will suffer what I believe are more audible effects like power compression. This is what I truly think people "hear" when running high vs low impedances on the same amp. more power always translates to more heat on the motor of the subwoofer. More heat means you get more power compression. the resistance rises fast as the coil/motor heats up.


Perfectly fair points, and I agree to an extent, the caveat being variable factors such as the power supply design of a particular amp, the motor strength of the driver, and relative efficiency and alignment of subwoofer enclosures.

What it comes down to is whether or not an amp can provide enough power to drive the speaker with enough energy to achieve the desired SPL with minimal distortion. If a class A/B bridged at 4 ohms is only 35% efficient, it is going to put more stress on the power supply and a higher load on the charging system then a class D that makes the same amount of power at 1 ohm and 80% efficiency. Which one has more headroom? Probably the one that plays loud enough, long enough, without clipping.


----------



## Resonant (Mar 20, 2011)

[email protected] to the sub


----------



## Eastman474 (Jan 8, 2010)

Some say a lower dampening factor sounds more natural...

I guess it all depends on preference, personally I think a higher df sounds better.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Damping factor doesn't mean much when we're talking about woofer control. 

Kelvin


----------



## bendow (Aug 5, 2010)

I always thought, or have been told there was really no difference when it comes to subs running at 1ohm,2ohm,4ohm,etc


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

bendow said:


> I always thought, or have been told there was really no difference when it comes to subs running at 1ohm,2ohm,4ohm,etc


If your amp has been designed for a 1 ohm operation, then there will not be much of a difference in running @ 4 ohm and 1 ohm other than the power increase. 
Distorsion figures in amps are too low to matter compared to the driver's distorsion ones. 

Ohh... And damping factor is an overatted spec  I know that now 

Kelvin


----------



## tyroneshoes (Mar 21, 2006)

I run my x1r at 4 ohms over 1 ohm because there is no need to overtax the amp. 

Plus Kenwood specs:
[email protected] ohms
[email protected] ohms
[email protected] ohm

Suspect.

But I have no need to put more power into a single 12 (icon, now mass) that the 600ish watts Ive been giving it. And the amp runs very cool and will last much longer. Plus the impedance curve of most woofers in the passband is something to consider as well


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

subwoofery said:


> Damping factor doesn't mean much when we're talking about woofer control in a short distance situation.
> 
> Kelvin


Fixed.


----------



## bbotelhoHI (Mar 7, 2011)

all of my amps were 1 ohm capable, and since i was a bass addict before, i bought my subwoofers to take full advantage of this fact. the two 10s i have now are 2 ohm SVC, ive had them running at 1 ohm on my a6 because i wanted the extra headroom. ive recently stripped everything from my truck and will be rewiring it all. the subs will be wired up at 4 ohm at the time and ill see how i like it from there.


----------



## Eastman474 (Jan 8, 2010)

A lot of times I feel that it depends on the amplifier yore using.. And sub or subs... I mean if you're running a big ol 15" cone with a super low dampening factor I have found that sometimes it starts sounding sloppy.. Although it does have a lot to do with install as well.


----------



## Tacoo (Apr 16, 2011)

This topic is very interesting.

I recently made a few changes to my sub section and noticed a few things along the lines of the conversation here.

the sub stayed constant which is an IDMAX 12"D2 in a 1.4 sealed enclosure.

I was all about putting the power to the MAX so I had a Digital Designs M1a 1200rms [email protected], After beating on this for a short time I noticed that the woofer was not happy and made some pretty odd noises almost seemed to suffer a loss of control with the power I was giving it. I then re wired my woofer to 4ohm which supplied appx. 500rms to the woofer and things did improve but the SPL suffered pretty bad and the control issues still were present.

I was then on the hunt and came across an Orion HCCA 225r so I thought I would give it a try(I am an old schooler). Installed the amp and again rewired the woofer to 1ohm so that I could utilize the 500rms from the amp. The woofer control and overall quality of sound was vastly improved and the SPL was very comparable to the DD at 1ohm.

I think it really comes down to the design of the amplifier and the idea that a watt is not a watt but that there is a quality of wattage that needs to be considered.

I realize that i went from a D class amplifier to a high current A/B amp but the fact that I dropped half the power and the SPL was comparable and the quality of sound increased hugely. 

I believe running a lower then rated impedance on a certain amp will degrade the quality forsure but when running an amp at the rated impedance no matter how low it is there will not really be any change other then power loss by running a higher impedance.

Hope my thoughts makes sense.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Eastman474 said:


> A lot of times I feel that it depends on the amplifier yore using.. And sub or subs... I mean if you're running a big ol 15" cone with a super low dampening factor I have found that sometimes it starts sounding sloppy.. Although it does have a lot to do with install as well.


That's what you would think and it might be true in a lot of cases. I'm running two 15" subs with paper cones and as my friend said yesterday it sounds like I'm running two high end 10" subs when I play rock music but it goes incredibly deep on rap. 90% of people would never believe I have two 15s back there when I play normal music. They're incredibly tight and fast.


----------



## cleansoundz (May 14, 2008)

MarkZ said:


> Heh, nobody runs at 1 ohm if the amp is "just as well" at 4 ohms. People who run at 1 ohm tend to do so because they double or triple the power.
> 
> Also, the damping factor monster has been slain in here for years. Its rotting corpse is stinking up the joint. Basically, it has no bearing on anything.
> 
> To the OP, it ain't about SQ. It's about longevity. Running some amps at very low impedances is really pushing things. But other amps can do it just fine. It all depends on how it's designed.


This is a true statement. Technology has caught up over the last 10 years where running woofers at a 1 ohm load doesn't take away from the quality of sound as it did in the past. Personally, I always run with 2 ohms.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Lets just hope that technology catches up to the rest of the world where rail voltages are high enough that you can get good power out of sane impedances.


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

chad said:


> Lets just hope that technology catches up to the rest of the world where rail voltages are high enough that you can get good power out of sane impedances.


It should be easy if they move automobiles up to 48 volt DC electrical systems!:laugh:


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

If your imagination is up to the task, there are always items to be used to achieve something enviable !


----------



## minbari (Mar 3, 2011)

chad said:


> Lets just hope that technology catches up to the rest of the world where rail voltages are high enough that you can get good power out of sane impedances.


that is possible now. in the 90's we had 2000watt amplifiers that were only 4 ohm stable. they were much higher voltage! like they could be used as backup generators if you fed them a 60hz sine wave, lol.

the cost is what killed em. really big expensive parts compared to low voltage high current versions we have now. adding 6 more fets to handle the current of a low ohm amplifier cost next to nothing.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

just because it was expensive in the 90's does not mean that it has to be now..... 
 

But I think we are on the same page.

But from experience I still think they feel/sound different loaded differently when you are actually behind the wheel at a mixing console... most certainly.

Crown touted really low impedance operation and ironically I found them to have the most drastic difference.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Interesting this was brought up again. I just changed impedance from 2 ohm to 8 ohm to try and get to the bottom of why my amp will shut down at high volumes only in the 60hz to 100hz range. It will play the low earthquake bass all day long with no issues.

So I went from 2 ohms to 8 ohms without calibrating the MS8. I wasn't expecting an audible difference, my only plan was to level match and crank it up to see if the amp will still shut down under the right circumstances. What I ended up with was slightly muddier bass. It wasn't as tight and crisp as before and didn't play the upper frequencies as easy. So I recalibrated and it made a small difference but still not as good as before. 

On the bright side, I haven't gotten the amp to shut down yet but I've had limited playing time. Maybe I accidentally ran the subs out of phase with the mids when I did the swap. Would this cause the conditions I've described?


----------



## thomasluke (Jun 10, 2011)

Yes, Most def try a few swaps and report back. The biggest thing you loss whaen you drop your impendace is efficiency plus you generate more heat as well as having higher current draw on your electrical system.


----------



## madmaxz (Feb 11, 2009)

Ive been playing around with my new arc audio black series 12 in dual 4 ohm. At first I had it wired to the Rockford t1500bdcp in series at 8 ohms gains about alittle less then half way my guess is about 600-700 watts while I thought it sounded good it seemed muddy and bass lines that used to be clearly separated were muddled together. I thought maybe it still needed some breakin. 2 days ago i change the wiring to parallel to run at 2ohm, backed the gain down to about 1/4 and tried that. Output was down but clarity was through the roof.. Night and day difference way tighter. Today I switched it back to make sure my ears wernt playing tricks on me. Muddy and bottom
Heavy/boomy again bass lines pushed together. Switched it back and like before night and day. So I'm not sure if it's a power thing i don't think so since both ways were just as loud. My guess is the amp has some design issue running at 8 ohm or close to it.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

madmaxz said:


> Ive been playing around with my new arc audio black series 12 in dual 4 ohm. At first I had it wired to the Rockford t1500bdcp in series at 8 ohms gains about alittle less then half way my guess is about 600-700 watts while I thought it sounded good it seemed muddy and bass lines that used to be clearly separated were muddled together. I thought maybe it still needed some breakin. 2 days ago i change the wiring to parallel to run at 2ohm, backed the gain down to about 1/4 and tried that. Output was down but clarity was through the roof.. Night and day difference way tighter. Today I switched it back to make sure my ears wernt playing tricks on me. Muddy and bottom
> Heavy/boomy again bass lines pushed together. Switched it back and like before night and day. So I'm not sure if it's a power thing i don't think so since both ways were just as loud. My guess is the amp has some design issue running at 8 ohm or close to it.


Where do you cross your sub and your midbass @? Slope?

Kelvin


----------



## madmaxz (Feb 11, 2009)

80 up 80 down 18db


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

madmaxz said:


> Ive been playing around with my new arc audio black series 12 in dual 4 ohm. At first I had it wired to the Rockford t1500bdcp in series at 8 ohms gains about alittle less then half way my guess is about 600-700 watts while I thought it sounded good it seemed muddy and bass lines that used to be clearly separated were muddled together. I thought maybe it still needed some breakin. 2 days ago i change the wiring to parallel to run at 2ohm, backed the gain down to about 1/4 and tried that. Output was down but clarity was through the roof.. Night and day difference way tighter. Today I switched it back to make sure my ears wernt playing tricks on me. Muddy and bottom
> Heavy/boomy again bass lines pushed together. Switched it back and like before night and day. So I'm not sure if it's a power thing i don't think so since both ways were just as loud. My guess is the amp has some design issue running at 8 ohm or close to it.


I've had the exact same results going from 2ohm to 8ohm and with two different subs. There is an audible difference for some reason.


----------



## madmaxz (Feb 11, 2009)

Rockford says the output filters arnt designed to operate at 8 ohm. What ever that means arc audio said the same thing.


----------



## rape_ape (Sep 22, 2010)

4ohms vs 1 ohm is a false dilemma, imho. I'm running 900w @ 2 ohms, and am happy. 

(new hifonics BRZ1200.1D on an alpie 1243D)... currently (hah!) redesigning for vented box..


----------



## madmaxz (Feb 11, 2009)

What Would I gain going from a t1500bdcp running at 1 ohm 1700 watts to a 2500bdcp running 4 ohms 1800 watts? Less or more power draw? Tighter? More ess que ? 

Subs are 2 arc audio black 12's


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

madmaxz said:


> What Would I gain going from a t1500bdcp running at 1 ohm 1700 watts to a 2500bdcp running 4 ohms 1800 watts? Less or more power draw? Tighter? More ess que ?
> 
> Subs are 2 arc audio black 12's


probably equal or slightly less power draw.


The amp is going to be more efficient at 4 ohms. Less heat etc... The nice thing about class D amps is for a lot of them the efficiency loss as you lower your DCR is not as large as a class AB. you may be in the high 80's at 4 ohm DCR and mid 70's at 1 ohm DCR. Still better than a class AB at 4 ohms. Even better than a class G/H at 4 ohms.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

madmaxz said:


> What Would I gain going from a t1500bdcp running at 1 ohm 1700 watts to a 2500bdcp running 4 ohms 1800 watts? Less or more power draw? Tighter? More ess que ?
> 
> Subs are 2 arc audio black 12's


TJ Lacharite's 1991 Chevy Silverado - Car Audio Forum - Car Audio's Forum!
The NEW Linear Power amps - Car Audio Forum - Car Audio's Forum! - Page 3 

Therefore, you'll have a more reliable amp, that won't get as hot and sound less stressed @ 4 ohm... 

Kelvin


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

madmaxz said:


> Ive been playing around with my new arc audio black series 12 in dual 4 ohm. At first I had it wired to the Rockford t1500bdcp in series at 8 ohms gains about alittle less then half way my guess is about 600-700 watts while I thought it sounded good it seemed muddy and bass lines that used to be clearly separated were muddled together. I thought maybe it still needed some breakin. 2 days ago i change the wiring to parallel to run at 2ohm, backed the gain down to about 1/4 and tried that. Output was down but clarity was through the roof.. Night and day difference way tighter. Today I switched it back to make sure my ears wernt playing tricks on me. Muddy and bottom
> Heavy/boomy again bass lines pushed together. Switched it back and like before night and day. So I'm not sure if it's a power thing i don't think so since both ways were just as loud. My guess is the amp has some design issue running at 8 ohm or close to it.


The difference here is likely not the impedance but the series connection of the two subs. That DOES affect circuit damping. As I've written in this forum a thousand times, damping is dissipation of energy stored in the coil's inductance. The damping factor fallacy is that the amplifier's output impedance contributes. It doesn't, because it's in series with the coil's DCR and the coil's DCR is much higher than the amp's output impedance. THE DCR OF THE COIL IS CHOSEN BY THE DESIGNER TO DETERMINE THE RATE OF CURRENT FLOW THROUGH THE WOOFER. "DAMPING FACTOR" LEAVES THIS OUT AND SUGGESTS THAT THE AMPLIFIER'S OUTPUT IMPEDANCE DETERMINES THE FLOW OF CURRENT THROUGH THE COIL. BS! When you connect an additional woofer in series, you've doubled the series resistance through which the energy of each woofer must be dissipated. In addition, dissipating that energy through the second woofer DRIVES the second woofer.


----------



## denetnz (Jul 31, 2009)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> The difference here is likely not the impedance but the series connection of the two subs. That DOES affect circuit damping.


Thanks for the enlightenment Andy. If this is the case, it is staggering how many people don't know this critical fact. Presumably the same principle does not apply to two coils of the same sub in series - is that right?


----------



## minbari (Mar 3, 2011)

Actually out does apply. If you have the choice to wire in series on a DVC, that ifs usually better

Sent from my Motorola Electrify using Tapatalk


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

denetnz said:


> Thanks for the enlightenment Andy. If this is the case, it is staggering how many people don't know this critical fact. Presumably the same principle does not apply to two coils of the same sub in series - is that right?


The effect of series wiring inside a DVC sub is not the same as two separate motors because there's only one compliance--it's the compliance of the suspension coupled with the moving mass that contributes most of the impedance peak at resonance, which is our way of displaying the voltage stored in the motor. 

When given the opportunity, connect the coils of separate woofers in parallel and the coils of DVC woofers in series, not the other way around. 

Most amps are voltage sources. That means that the voltage available is determined by the audio signal and the maximum voltage available is determined by the power supply rails. REVC (also called DCR) is designed by the speaker designer to determine the amount of current that will pass through the coil (by Ohm's law E=IR). Current is what drives the woofer. The formula for motor force is (BL^2)/REvc. B is the strength of the magnet. L is the length of wire in the coil and REvc is the DCR of the coil. This can be abbreviated as "Turns squared/REvc". That means that force is increased when the resistance of the coil is decreased or when the number of turns in the magnetic gap is increased. 

This gets complicated becuase there are so many factors at play. More turns in the same amount of space means thinner wire, which raises the REvc. Fewer turns requires fatter wire which reduces the REvc. Opening the magnetic gap to fit more turns and bigger wire reduces B because the magnetic surfaces are farther apart. 

However, all of this has to be designed to go along with the mass of the cone and the stiffness of the suspension becuase the Qts ofthe driver is the measure of the interaction of the motor and the suspension. We call that damping, but I find that to be a bit misleading. I thnk it's better and more intuitive to think of Q from the other direction--as a measure of the "overshoot" the woofer allows at resonance (where all of this energy is stored). More overshoot (higher Q) means more bass at and just above resonance and less below. Lower Q means less bass at resonance and just above but a shallower roll-off for more bass below resonance. 

All of this is what Thiele and Small parameters indicate and once you get comfortable with the numbers it's pretty intuitive. TS parameters make determining the appropriate box volume for any given target response pretty simple. The air in a sealed box stuffens the suspension and contributes more overshoot. IN fact, the volume of air in the sealed box is calculated to increase overshoot by a specific amount to get you to the target response. 

For example, if you have a woofer with a Qts of .5 and you want a classical Butterworth rolloff from your woofer, you need a volume of air that will raise the Q by .2. You can figure this out pretty easily using the formula {[(Qtc/Qts)^2]-1}/Vas = Vb. By the same formula, if you have a woofer with a Qts of .9 and you want the same Butterworth rolloff, you're screwed. Can't happen because putting it in a box stuffens the suspension and raises the Q. You can't rearrange how this works, but you can rearrange what you hear. If the woofer has enough excurion (Xmax) and you have enough power and an EQ (not a 31-band graphic), you can boost the low frequencies and cut the frequencies where there's a peak. Does it sound the same? Sure, so long as the woofer and amp can keep up. Beware of this as a design, however. 12dB of boost requires 16x power. So if you have a 1600 watt amplifier, it can only produce 100 watts at other frequencies if you need it to produce 1600 watts for a frequency where you've boosted if you want to *replicate* the sound of a larger box that doesn't require the boost. Couple that with the fact that we like about 9dB more bass than the rest of the frequency spectrum in cars and you can see that this is an inefficient and expensive design, but it saves space. 

So, knowing that, maybe it now makes sense whan I write that woofers that look the same because they have the same basket and magnet aren't necessarily the same.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

I know, "ask for a quarter, get a dollar".


----------



## Oscar (Jun 20, 2010)

For a given standard dvc woofer, inductance is 1/4 in parallel compared to series. Granted, BL variance dominates distortion, lower inductance based distortion is still a good thing.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

Oscar said:


> For a given standard dvc woofer, inductance is 1/4 in parallel compared to series. Granted, BL variance dominates distortion, lower inductance based distortion is still a good thing.


But the L/R ratio doesn't change...


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

MarkZ said:


> But the L/R ratio doesn't change...


Which is precisely why DVC woofers work the way they do. Q remains the same in both configurations, so the box requirements don't change. It's simply a way to manage current flow from the amp.


----------



## Oscar (Jun 20, 2010)

MarkZ said:


> But the L/R ratio doesn't change...


hmm....I understand what you mean when you say the ratio doesn't change, but englighten me; what are the implications of it? Does the actual drop in Le not matter at all then?


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

The influence of inductance on the circuit is dependent on current flow. For example, if you consider a first order passive filter, if you don't change the L/R ratio you don't change the filter parameters.


----------



## Oscar (Jun 20, 2010)

MarkZ said:


> The influence of inductance on the circuit is dependent on current flow. For example, if you consider a first order passive filter, if you don't change the L/R ratio you don't change the filter parameters.


Hmm...So, IOW what you're saying is that different wiring configurations of multiple voice coil speakers doesn't affect the "true" inductance of the speaker, because of the constant L/R ratio?


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

Inductance is what causes the speaker to move. When the coils are in series, there's more inductance, so it moves without so much current. When the coils are in parallel, the inductance is reduced, so more current is necessary. Fortunately, that's what happens when the coils are in parallel.


----------



## minbari (Mar 3, 2011)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Inductance is what causes the speaker to move. When the coils are in series, there's more inductance, so it moves without so much current. When the coils are in parallel, the inductance is reduced, so more current is necessary. Fortunately, that's what happens when the coils are in parallel.


one question I have on that very subject. if the inductance goes up, doesnt this cause a natural low pass since it is combined with the RE of the woofer? or is the inductance low enough that is doesnt matter?


----------



## Oscar (Jun 20, 2010)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Inductance is what causes the speaker to move. When the coils are in series, there's more inductance, so it moves without so much current. When the coils are in parallel, the inductance is reduced, so more current is necessary. Fortunately, that's what happens when the coils are in parallel.


This I do understand since a coil is simply an inductor and removing the inductor leaves you with no loudspeaker, but from a "SQ" perspective, wouldn't a lower inductance from parallel wiring result in lower Le-based distortion?


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

I'm not sure what distortion you're referring to. Typically, distortion as a result of inductance is caused by the coil moving past the polepiece and changing from an "iron core" to an air core inductor. Extended polepieces help with this. Because this is assymetrical, it contributes even order distortion, which isn't as nasty sounding as odd order, which is contributed by symmetrical conditions (suspension, for example).

The low pass filter is a function of le and REVC, so the low pass filter also changes with the change in RE when the coils are connected in series and parallel.


----------



## minbari (Mar 3, 2011)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> I'm not sure what distortion you're referring to. Typically, distortion as a result of inductance is caused by the coil moving past the polepiece and changing from an "iron core" to an air core inductor. Extended polepieces help with this. Because this is assymetrical, it contributes even order distortion, which isn't as nasty sounding as odd order, which is contributed by symmetrical conditions (suspension, for example).
> 
> *The low pass filter is a function of le and REVC, so the low pass filter also changes with the change in RE when the coils are connected in series and parallel.*


good answer, hadn't considered that part.

so in this particular example, if you had 2ohm coil DVC, then wiring it in series would raise the LPF effect in the sub. another reason to wire series.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> I'm not sure what distortion you're referring to. Typically, distortion as a result of inductance is caused by the coil moving past the polepiece and changing from an "iron core" to an air core inductor. Extended polepieces help with this. Because this is assymetrical, it contributes even order distortion, which isn't as nasty sounding as odd order, which is contributed by symmetrical conditions (suspension, for example).


I thought he was probably referring to hysteresis. That should have a less linear relationship with Re than dLe(x) if I'm not mistaken.



minbari said:


> good answer, hadn't considered that part.
> 
> so in this particular example, if you had 2ohm coil DVC, then wiring it in series would raise the LPF effect in the sub. another reason to wire series.


Nooo I don't think that's what he meant. If you wire it in series, you increase Le by the same amount that you increase Re, leaving the ratio the same and therefore the filter properties the same.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

MarkZ said:


> Nooo I don't think that's what he meant. If you wire it in series, you increase Le by the same amount that you increase Re, leaving the ratio the same and therefore the filter properties the same.


Cool, thought so, but it's nice to have it checked.


----------



## minbari (Mar 3, 2011)

MarkZ said:


> Nooo I don't think that's what he meant. If you wire it in series, you increase Le by the same amount that you increase Re, leaving the ratio the same and therefore the filter properties the same.


yup, thanks for the clarification. rechecked my math and you are correct. LPF tracks exactly, lol.


----------



## Oscar (Jun 20, 2010)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> I'm not sure what distortion you're referring to. Typically, distortion as a result of inductance is caused by the coil moving past the polepiece and changing from an "iron core" to an air core inductor. Extended polepieces help with this. Because this is assymetrical, it contributes even order distortion, which isn't as nasty sounding as odd order, which is contributed by symmetrical conditions (suspension, for example).
> 
> The low pass filter is a function of le and REVC, so the low pass filter also changes with the change in RE when the coils are connected in series and parallel.


exactly that distortion you elaborated on: the one that arises from the Le-vs-position as the coil swings in and out around the pole piece. Would it not be better to start off with a lower Le to begin with by having the coils in parallel?


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> ...
> 
> When given the opportunity, connect the coils of separate woofers in parallel and the coils of DVC woofers in series, not the other way around.
> 
> ...


Just wanted to make sure... You mean wiring like so? 









Kelvin


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

subwoofery said:


> Just wanted to make sure... You mean wiring like so?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes yes yes.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

Oscar said:


> exactly that distortion you elaborated on: the one that arises from the Le-vs-position as the coil swings in and out around the pole piece. Would it not be better to start off with a lower Le to begin with by having the coils in parallel?


 
Typically we hear that distortion in the midrange as the LPF changes frequency. Doesn't matter so much in a sub, since it isn't playing midrange. 

If you were building a home audio 2-way speaker and wanted a small 6" to make a bunch of bass and also play up to 3k, then this would probably present a problem, but the series or parallel wiring wouldn't fix it.


----------



## Oscar (Jun 20, 2010)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> Typically we hear that distortion in the midrange as the LPF changes frequency. Doesn't matter so much in a sub, since it isn't playing midrange.
> 
> If you were building a home audio 2-way speaker and wanted a small 6" to make a bunch of bass and also play up to 3k, then this would probably present a problem, but the series or parallel wiring wouldn't fix it.


Ah, I see. Learned something new.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

MarkZ said:


> Nooo I don't think that's what he meant. If you wire it in series, you increase Le by the same amount that you increase Re, leaving the ratio the same and therefore the filter properties the same.


 
Yes, this is correct.


----------



## Richv72 (May 11, 2012)

No matter if dampening factor makes a difference or not, given the choice I will take an amp with higher dampening factor over lower if all other things are equal, every time.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Richv72 said:


> No matter if dampening factor makes a difference or not, given the choice I will take an amp with higher dampening factor over lower if all other things are equal, every time.


I dig tube amps in some instances, do you dig tube amps?


----------



## Richv72 (May 11, 2012)

chad said:


> I dig tube amps in some instances, do you dig tube amps?


I never listened to a tube amp before.


----------



## rc10mike (Mar 27, 2008)

Some high end amps have adjustable damping factor. I wonder why they would do that..


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

It's for fine tuning your system



> Another new feature is a user adjustable Damping Factor feedback control that allows the user to adjust the amplifier's output impedance by varying the amount of negative feedback. Impedance can now be precisely set to suit the listener's taste, and to improve control of the loudspeaker loads to deliver best performance.
> 
> LOW -- Lowest damping factor, good loudspeaker control, most natural sound.
> MED -- Better loudspeaker control, with some impact on sound quality.
> ...


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

It's interesting that they say that you can adjust negative feedback to change output impedance. They fail to mention that adjusting negative feedback can have a huge impact on distortion. So, the sounds that some people might be attributing to damping factor/output impedance are actually products of changing the distortion signature (and possibly the frequency response, depending on how the NFB is being changed...)

BTW: brilliant marketing. If they were to say that turning this knob adds distortion, nobody would turn the damn knob. But to frame it in terms of a tradeoff between speaker control and essque... brilliant.


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

chad said:


> I dig tube amps in some instances, do you dig tube amps?


I recently had a buddy of mine offer to sell me his custom tube amplifiers. He said that he had output transformers for 4, 8, and 16 ohm final impedance loads. I was all interested, until he told me the price.

I have another friend who wants me to look at a non-functioning McIntosh tube pre-amplifier and amplifier as well as a working McIntosh tuner. He said he would also toss his working circa 1974 Technics 1200 into the mix if I was interested. My wife said I am getting all nostalgic again.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Richv72 said:


> I never listened to a tube amp before.





ChrisB said:


> I recently had a buddy of mine offer to sell me his custom tube amplifiers. He said that he had output transformers for 4, 8, and 16 ohm final impedance loads.


they sound pretty decent, just like every other solid amplifier.

But since DF is the driven impedance divided by the output impedance.... then tell me what the damping factor of a tube amp would be if you have to match the output impedance tot he driven impedance?

I'll start the math for you. 8 ohms / 8 ohms.

I've never heard a functioning tube amplifier that exhibit "lack of control" or "anemic low end" due to a damping factor of ONE or close to ONE.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

And this is why "damoing factor" is nonsense. The whols comceot of supposed control is that the lower the output impedance of the amplifier, the faster the energy stored in the speaker's inductance is dissipated. The current has to pass through the DCR of the woofer, and that mostly determines the circuit damping. 

The while thing should have been called out long ago when it was devised. The "nominal" impedance of the driver is what we call the impedance and it's an approximation of the current requlation in the circuit. How is it that the impedance of the speaker is how we decide which speaker can be driven by the amp, but when we want to sell transistors, we claim that the output resistance of the transistor is now somehow the important factor. 

The problem isn't in lack of control, it's in the frequency response changes that are caused by the series resistance of the amps output. Tube amps with high output impedance make the sound "warm" because they attenuate less as the woofer's Fs.


----------



## ATOMICTECH62 (Jan 24, 2009)

Damping factor is a lot like torque on an engine.Speeding up and slowing down will be less instantaneous.
Damping factor was an important spec about 70 years ago when rating a tube amp because the output transformer had high series resistance.This just like selecting an inductor for a passive crossover,normally you want one with the lowest DCR that is practical.Back then iirc a factor of 1 was considered fair and a factor of 4 was great.
By today's standards damping factors of 50-5000 are so high that they shouldnt even be considered.
Wikipedia explains damping factor very well.
There is one thing that hasn't been mentioned in this thread,that is the fact that all class D amps have a passive low pass crossover in the signal path that connects to the speaker outputs.This is there to filter out the high frequency switching (50khz-500khz)that the audio signal is superimposed on.
They have to be designed for the ohm load they will drive.
The harder the amp is driven the hotter they get.Of all the thousands of amps I have repaired over the years the output caps and coils are the most replaced parts.Exploded caps and melted coils pose problems for output mosfets and power supply mosfets then they take a dump and explode also.
When the filter runs hot and under heavy loads the parameters will change.Things like phase,resistance,emf and other factors will react with the voice coil parameters wich will also be changing due to heat that can cause the way a sub sounds.
I HATE it when a customer insists on running a amp at 1 ohm because most amps dont put out more power into 1 ohm than they do at 2 and if they do its not that much more.I attribute this mainly because the more they are loaded down the less efficient they become and the more current they draw which pulls the voltage down to a point were it balances out and the amp simply acts like a big load resistor soaking up current and dissipating it as heat.
This wouldnt be that big of a problem if the gain is adjusted properly so the amp is not continually being over driven into hard clipping.Im sure the people on this forum know how to adjust an amplifier but for the masses out there that want to be the loudest moron on their street this is a death sentence for the amp and subs.
99 percent of all amps I repair have the gains,bass boost,frequency and sometimes the subsonic filter maxed out.These people have paid for my house.
I love when someone tells me their amp clamps out at a kajilian kajiian watts at like .1 ohms
WTF is clamped?I think I figured it out.With all knobs cranked at max to get a square wave.Take a non RMS volt meter and measure the highest voltage at the terminals,which will be at the Fs of the speaker system(could be as high as 200 ohms)then square volts over ohms.Lets see 60x60 at .5 ohms=7200watts.NOT.
As long as the amp is not being over driven 1 ohm is fine but there wont much headroom as the power supply will already be maxed out and the voltage in the car will be sagging.This could be considered some thing like damping factor between the amp and the cars electrical system.A large capacitor would help but that's subjective and there are other threads on the issue.

2 OHMS BABY!


----------



## xtremevette (Apr 14, 2011)

89grand said:


> I think the degrading of sound on subwoofers is blown out of proportion, and so is dampening factor and distortion. I wouldn't go out of my way to run a 1 ohm load, but I wouldn't care much if I had a 1 ohm load. I base the subwoofer impedance by the amp, and number or drivers I use.
> 
> For instance, I'd rather run two sub in parallel and get a 1 ohm load, then to wire them in series to get 4...assuming the amp could handle it.


I think dampening factor is a big one. You have to have control over the speaker.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Kill me now. 

Sent from my Sony Tablet S using Tapatalk 2


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

xtremevette said:


> I think dampening factor is a big one. You have to have control over the speaker.


This is like switching back and forth between the NYT and Fox news.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> This is like switching back and forth between the NYT and Fox news.


Yep... Some reply to a thread without reading it first  

Kelvin


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> This is like switching back and forth between the NYT and Fox news.


Dampening factor sounds like a rating system on different foreplay techniques.


----------



## Pimpnyou204 (Jul 13, 2011)

xtremevette said:


> I think dampening factor is a big one. You have to have control over the speaker.


Now I have read this entire thread I haven't seen it anywhere but when ppl say "I have more control over my sub with my mcintosh than my power acoustik had." Would be completely untrue?

With no dampening factor as a measurement for the supposed cone control does that mean amps control the speaker all the same? What I mean is all amps will have control over the speaker the same as another assuming the amps are not clipping? Or is there just no way to measure the difference.


----------



## 14642 (May 19, 2008)

Amps don't damp the motion of the speaker. Amps with ridiculously high output impedance (like an ohm or more) can degrade the speaker's ability to damp it's own motion. 

Damping factor is a ******** spec.


----------



## Pimpnyou204 (Jul 13, 2011)

Yes I understand that but what I mean is what is controlling the speaker.. What gives it the warm, transient, or dynamic sound that people say amps have.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Pimpnyou204 said:


> Yes I understand that but what I mean is what is controlling the speaker.. What gives it the warm, transient, or dynamic sound that people say amps have.


Quite a few things can give you a better perception of dynamic - frequency response is one 
Mosconi is far from flat below 100Hz <-- said to have enormous headroom 

Kelvin


----------



## Pimpnyou204 (Jul 13, 2011)

This is what I'm referring to but amps are supposed to amplify the signal not alter it like an EQ.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

Pimpnyou204 said:


> This is what I'm referring to but amps are supposed to amplify the signal not alter it like an EQ.


Unless you want that "warm, transient, or dynamic" sound you mentioned.


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

Can't you just hear the warmth produced by even-order harmonic distortion?


----------



## Pimpnyou204 (Jul 13, 2011)

MarkZ said:


> Unless you want that "warm, transient, or dynamic" sound you mentioned.


But there's no way to actually measure that then correct? You can look at the FR graph but that would only take u so far.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

Pimpnyou204 said:


> But there's no way to actually measure that then correct? You can look at the FR graph but that would only take u so far.


_Anything_ can be measured. 

If you're wondering whether the percept of "warmth" has been correlated with certain measurements, the answer can be found in Chris's post. It's often said that "warmth" can be attributed to a particular distribution of harmonic distortion (usually rich in even-order components) . There are also certain frequency response changes that can contribute to that effect, specifically in the upper midrange.

When Bob Carver modified his amp to be more like the other one, it was a little more involved than just adding salt to taste. I highly doubt that he blindly tweaked something, listened to it, and then blindly tweaked some more. His actions were deliberate. It came from his vast experience understanding how specific changes in the electrical signal can give rise to different sounds.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Pimpnyou204 said:


> But there's no way to actually measure that then correct? You can look at the FR graph but that would only take u so far.


I've posted a few times freq response + distortion over the whole bandwith for a lot of amps - try to search for it. 
You'll see that no amp has the same distortion profile 

Kelvin


----------



## Pimpnyou204 (Jul 13, 2011)

Do u remember the specific thread or are they posted randomly each in different thread?


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Here's one post to get you started  

Kelvin


----------



## Tenacious (Jan 18, 2013)

1 ohm? That's nothing... 0.5 is where it's at


----------



## evangojason (Feb 12, 2010)

So I have a DLS Ultimate A5 and a 12IDMAX-D2. The sub channel is rated 300w @ 4 and 780w @ 1. So everyone seams to agree my amp would be working harder at 1 ohm. I'm wondering if at 4ohms my amp would be maxed out and clipping to get a decent level of volume compared to at 1ohm the amp should provide same volume with out coming close to clipping. I'm not talking about pushing it to the limits and trying to get every 780watts out of it. I guess it would compare to a truck towing a load with a V8 vs a V6. V6 should get better MPG but under those conditions of a heavy load the V8 would probably do better. Any thoughts?


----------



## ZAKOH (Nov 26, 2010)

evangojason said:


> So I have a DLS Ultimate A5 and a 12IDMAX-D2. The sub channel is rated 300w @ 4 and 780w @ 1. So everyone seams to agree my amp would be working harder at 1 ohm. I'm wondering if at 4ohms my amp would be maxed out and clipping to get a decent level of volume compared to at 1ohm the amp should provide same volume with out coming close to clipping. I'm not talking about pushing it to the limits and trying to get every 780watts out of it. I guess it would compare to a truck towing a load with a V8 vs a V6. V6 should get better MPG but under those conditions of a heavy load the V8 would probably do better. Any thoughts?


If you listen loud music content like rap or other synthetic bass, I think it would be prudent to wire for 1ohm impedance just so that you don't send clipped signal to such nice and expensive subwoofer. However, if your taste is mostly in SQ content played at reasonable volume level, one could be surprised how far an honest 300watts of power could go, specially with a relatively high efficiency subwoofer, and I think ID subs have better than average efficiency.


----------



## evangojason (Feb 12, 2010)

99% of the time I'm tuned for SQ. But every so often I do like to see what my equipment is capable of (without being stupid). I've heard people say the IDMAX sounded "great with only 200w", and I've heard "don't even both unless use have 500w or more". I do plan on trying both when I get to that point but just looking to gain some knowledge till then. If I can get away with 4ohm without clipping or distortion I'd much rather go that route just to keep the amp and electrical system happy. Thanks for your input.


----------



## bbfoto (Aug 28, 2005)

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> I know, "ask for a quarter, get a dollar".


LOL, Thanks for the dollar! In this case it's MORE than 4x the value.


----------



## Richv72 (May 11, 2012)

Why dont people just buy larger amps instead of trying to squeeze every last drop of power out of their smaller amps?. Did this trend start because the spl rules have different power classes?. I could understand if people were limited to certain amounts of amp power if it was a competition, but why would people that dont compete in spl competitions run super low ohm loads when they could just buy a larger amp?.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Richv72 said:


> Did this trend start because the spl rules have different power classes?.


Yes.


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

And size. Look at a 3000 watt at 4 ohm vs one at 1 ohm. 

And cost. The ones that are lower impedance stable at a certain power class are usually cheaper than a comparable non low impedance one.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

cubdenno said:


> And size. Look at a 3000 watt at 4 ohm vs one at 1 ohm.
> 
> And cost. The ones that are lower impedance stable at a certain power class are usually cheaper than a comparable non low impedance one.


You are just pretending that you are not as old as you are.


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

Oh I am old... And remember my oldest is ten years older than yours! At least. 

So when he is trying to shoehorn 3kw into his car on a budget, utilizing a 1ohm stable amp is pretty much the only way.

Plus, my Sundown SAZ1500d wired for 1 ohm going strong since 2008.

I know it's blasphemy here on DIYMA, but I just don't have a problem with running subs on. Low impedance capable amp. My old ears listening to to music I listen to, at the volume I listen at just doesn't hear any issues.



Asphalt Ballet can't be helped by EssQue amps!


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

that's a decently recorded album mang.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

cubdenno said:


> Oh I am old... Plus, my Sundown SAZ1500d wired for 1 ohm going strong since 2008.


Old here too, got the same amp making a JL Audio 12W6 sing ! It kicked a DD 12 hard, also !


----------



## legend94 (Mar 15, 2006)

evangojason said:


> So I have a DLS Ultimate A5 and a 12IDMAX-D2. The sub channel is rated 300w @ 4 and 780w @ 1. So everyone seams to agree my amp would be working harder at 1 ohm. I'm wondering if at 4ohms my amp would be maxed out and clipping to get a decent level of volume compared to at 1ohm the amp should provide same volume with out coming close to clipping. I'm not talking about pushing it to the limits and trying to get every 780watts out of it. I guess it would compare to a truck towing a load with a V8 vs a V6. V6 should get better MPG but under those conditions of a heavy load the V8 would probably do better. Any thoughts?


Your amp is made to run at 1ohm


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Oliver said:


> Old here too, got the same amp making a JL Audio 12W6 sing ! It kicked a DD 12 hard, also !


LIAR!!!!! I read that you're a 3 year old brat :laugh:

Kelvin


----------



## evangojason (Feb 12, 2010)

legend94 said:


> Your amp is made to run at 1ohm


If I had low end gear I wouldn't even consider it, but I can't see 780w of DLS Ultimate power to a IDMAX sounding bad (although I'm sure someone like jimmy could make it happen). My biggest concern would be current and heat. Once I get a new car and start the install I will try both 4ohm and 1ohm loads and test for sound, heat, and current issues.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

evangojason said:


> Once I get a new car and start the install I will try both 4ohm and 1ohm loads and test for sound, heat, and current issues.


I'm hip to hearing your thoughts. Make sure you match levels, even if the 4 ohm config runs out of power earlier.


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

evangojason said:


> If I had low end gear I wouldn't even consider it, but I can't see 780w of DLS Ultimate power to a IDMAX sounding bad (although I'm sure someone like jimmy could make it happen). My biggest concern would be current and heat. Once I get a new car and start the install I will try both 4ohm and 1ohm loads and test for sound, heat, and current issues.


I am not familiar with your amp so not sure of class or specs but, obviously expect more current draw because you are asking amp to produce more power. If the amp efficiencies are the same, current draw at a specific voltage will be the same for a same power output whether 4 ohms or 1 ohms.

You will probably see depending on woofer power compression, a 4-5 db increase going from 300 to 780.


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

chad said:


> that's a decently recorded album mang.


I was kidding and only used them as a reference becuse we have spoken about them and you have the songs. I lost that album a long time ago!!


----------



## evangojason (Feb 12, 2010)

cubdenno said:


> I am not familiar with your amp so not sure of class or specs but, obviously expect more current draw because you are asking amp to produce more power. If the amp efficiencies are the same, current draw at a specific voltage will be the same for a same power output whether 4 ohms or 1 ohms.
> 
> You will probably see depending on woofer power compression, a 4-5 db increase going from 300 to 780.


Ultimate A5 - 980 Watts 3-channel amplifier


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

cubdenno said:


> I was kidding and only used them as a reference becuse we have spoken about them and you have the songs. I lost that album a long time ago!!


When i get a lossless rip I'll hook you up.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

evangojason said:


> If I had low end gear I wouldn't even consider it, but I can't see 780w of DLS Ultimate power to a IDMAX sounding bad (although I'm sure someone like jimmy could make it happen). *My biggest concern would be current and heat.* Once I get a new car and start the install I will try both 4ohm and 1ohm loads and test for sound, heat, and current issues.


Speaker / Amplifier Wiring FAQ - Tutorial

Wire it for higher resistance and the heat will be lower ( 20 mph in a car )
Wire it at lower resistance, in parallel 2 ohms, 1 ohm, etc.., ( 100 mph in a car )

The more you ask the amp to do ( work/load/power output )the harder it will be on the electrical system. The more current that will be drawn, the bigger the wires will need to be, etc..,


----------



## evangojason (Feb 12, 2010)

Basically I was referring to what car I end up getting, what alternator it will have and how the amps will be installed. I will have an A4 bridged to Legatia L6's and the A5 running the IDMAX12 and L1's (or wide bands). Or if I upgrade the DSP and pick up some L3's I could run the A4 as a 4ch and L6's, L3's, L1's as a 3way front.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

Oliver said:


> Speaker / Amplifier Wiring FAQ - Tutorial
> 
> Wire it for higher resistance and the heat will be lower ( 20 mph in a car )
> Wire it at lower resistance, in parallel 2 ohms, 1 ohm, etc.., ( 100 mph in a car )
> ...


This is why level matching is important. If you have an amp that's delivering 250w to a sub at 1 ohm, it shouldn't be running a whole lot hotter than an amp delivering 250w to a sub at 4 ohms.

If instead you want to compare an amp delivering 700w at 1 ohm vs. the same amp delivering 250w at 4 ohms, then OBVIOUSLY it's going to be hotter. But that's not impedance making it hotter, that's the idiot behind the volume knob.


----------



## RNBRAD (Oct 30, 2012)

ChrisB said:


> I recently had a buddy of mine offer to sell me his custom tube amplifiers. He said that he had output transformers for 4, 8, and 16 ohm final impedance loads. I was all interested, until he told me the price.
> 
> I have another friend who wants me to look at a non-functioning McIntosh tube pre-amplifier and amplifier as well as a working McIntosh tuner. He said he would also toss his working circa 1974 Technics 1200 into the mix if I was interested. My wife said I am getting all nostalgic again.


That's the holy grail of TT's!! Very sought after piece in the high end home audio world.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

I have a pair of that vintage.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

MarkZ said:


> ... then *OBVIOUSLY* it's going to be hotter. But that's not impedance making it hotter, that's the idiot behind the volume knob.


You aced it Mark 

My bad , as a poll would prove, most here have never had to purchase a 2nd amp after the first one burned up due to running at lower impedance.

Hell, they probably think it was the distortion in the Jimi Hendrix music


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Oliver said:


> My bad , as a poll would prove, *most here have never had to purchase a 2nd amp after the first one burned up due to running at lower impedance.*


F___in IDIOTS


----------



## cleansoundz (May 14, 2008)

cubdenno said:


> Oh I am old... And remember my oldest is ten years older than yours! At least.
> 
> So when he is trying to shoehorn 3kw into his car on a budget, utilizing a 1ohm stable amp is pretty much the only way.
> 
> ...


The Sundown saz 1500d are built to run at 1 ohm.


----------



## RNBRAD (Oct 30, 2012)

McIntosh MCC443, 18yrs @ 1 ohm load. Never even a hiccup, heat related or anything. My system is so old though I had to redo my copper wire ends as they got oxidized over the years and this amp will melt some junctions and fuse blocks. Found that out the hard way.


----------



## SaturnSL1 (Jun 27, 2011)

I'm running my USA400 at 1 ohm and I really can't tell a difference in sound quality. Sounds exactly the same, it just makes my mirrors dance a lot earlier on the volume knob compared to 4 or 2 ohms.

Oh and it draws A LOT more power now.


----------



## cleansoundz (May 14, 2008)

I just installed my 2 original RE audio SEs to a 1 ohm load and I must say that I am very pleased. I noticed no difference from listening to my subs at a 2 ohm load for 5+ years. My amp stays cool to the touch as well.


----------

