# Amps review Rockford vs Xtant vs Sony



## marchel (Dec 15, 2008)

Dear All,

I was planning to do a review on these amps separately for a long time, But I'm busy , so I decided to mix the reviews in one post.

The amps are Sony zr554, Xtant 2200i and a new rockford fosgate power T4002.










































The gut pix of the Sony amp is on my dead laptop, So I cant get it.

Description:

First the Xtant, this is an old amp 100w x 2 @ 4, Bought it 10 yrs ago ,still fine today. The amps is made with stainless chasis with incased forced heatsink inside the amp, The board is thick and multi layered, there are smd under the board ,nothing remarkable about the parts used, except that it uses 3 toroids.

The Sony amps is a new amp ,50w x 4, it uses ordinary cheap board and also are the parts, Nothing to write home about.

The Rockford amps is a new amps rated at 125 x 2 , It is the smallest of the 3 and only half the size of the xtant, and as you can see in the picture the parts are mostly smd and the board look more like a PC board than an amp. The resistors are 1% and the caps are sealed type, The type that's used in expensive amps and PC motherboard.

The Sound. 

First the xtant, This amp sound clean but a bit sterile, the bass is tight but lack a little weight , But regardless what I said above this amp have over all good SQ, And could be used for SQ competition.

Second the Sony amp, This amp, Compared to the others, This amps have the least powerful bass sound, If you plan to use the rear channel for sub duty, forget it, The SQ suffers alot with this amps, But for Hi pass use, this amp is ok. But despite what you might think , This actually sound more musical to my ear than the xtant, The highs are more lively albeit a little less refined than the xtant. Most probably by it simplier circuitry.

Lastly the Rockford, This amp is what I use now, Only for the reason that it is the only one that fits under the front seat. This amp have the best bass and midbass of the 3 , If you want great sounding bass from an amp, this wont disappoint you, The SQ of this amp tends toward warmth , While I find that this have refined sounding highs, I still like the less refined but livelier highs of the sony amp, The sony tends to sound a bit more open from 5khz on up due to this.

Caution , This review is only on man's opinion and perception, And just take it lightly. The difference in the sound of the 3 amps are very small but audible to my ears. This might not be audible to all and not all may care. If you ask me who is the winner in this review though, I will say the Rockford , Due to the size and power.


----------



## marchel (Dec 15, 2008)

I forgot to add that , For SQ evaluation, I disengaged all the proccessing these amps have including the XO. Using the internal XO on these 3, makes the over all sound quality and transparency a notch lower on each of them. For actual use , I only use the XO on my HU.


----------



## Deton Nation (Jul 3, 2009)

nice review. thanks! The Fosgate is Class D?


----------



## cd300 (Mar 25, 2009)

Good review. I will add that I am an avid Xtant user and I agree with the "lack of bass" from a sub channel. Of course, we all know that fosgate has always had balls However, I love the sound of the Xtant amps (pre Miltek)! They're not too harsh and just "warm" enough for me. Just wish they would have continued along the full class d amp line like the 1.1,etc


----------



## marchel (Dec 15, 2008)

The Fosgate is pure class A/B.

I decided to add a close up view of the rockford amp gut,for those who like amp porn. As you can see, the amps is built very densely, The main reason why it is small.


----------



## no6thgear (Jul 24, 2009)

lol @ sony


----------



## jonnyanalog (Nov 14, 2007)

I have a t400-2 and its a very nice amp. Very solidly built, small, and HEAVY. I think its a shame that most people will scoff at the RF because its RF and miss out on a truly enjoyable experience.


----------



## marchel (Dec 15, 2008)

jonnyanalog said:


> I have a t400-2 and its a very nice amp. Very solidly built, small, and HEAVY. I think its a shame that most people will scoff at the RF because its RF and miss out on a truly enjoyable experience.


Exactly!


----------



## jasonsrt4 (Jul 15, 2009)

I have that rockford amp and like it as well.


----------



## Torquem (Jun 27, 2009)

no6thgear said:


> lol @ sony


thats what I thought at first :laugh:

But hey, if it works!

good reviews!


----------



## Rodek (Aug 19, 2006)

If you were on a super tight budget, the Sony seems like it could still be a viable choice. Nice reviews!!!


----------



## 26062 (Jul 5, 2009)

good review..!


----------



## marchel (Dec 15, 2008)

Hi , I finally got a time to take pics of the sony amp, You'll notice that on the top side of the board , there are'nt many parts, So i flipped the board to see what's below, The parts used are adequate for it's price.

Sorry for the gun in the pics, When I opened up the amp, a friend came to my house playing with the gun, He said why not shoot the amp on the shooting range and post it on you tube, This would be a unique video, So I got carried away and took a pics of the amp with the gun, But then change my mind. When I look at my photos the next day, there are no pic of the board without the gun in it, and the amp was already installed back on my beater car.


----------



## its_bacon12 (Aug 16, 2007)

I'd venture out to say that probably the reason the Rockford has the better bass response is the built in EQ. They started doing that to their amps a long time ago and have kept it up.


----------



## marchel (Dec 15, 2008)

I'm not sure about this, The punch EQ is turned all the way down at all times and so too is the XO. Unless there is no way to defeat the EQ.

But I read a magazine review of older but not really old RF amp that also have Punch EQ, The FR graph of the amp is flat.


----------

