# Need a good SQ 2-channel amp 500x2 RMS or more



## PrinceCharming (Aug 31, 2012)

I need a 2-channel amp to drive a JBL C608GTI MKII component system (150RMS/600Peak each). Can anyone recommend a good SQ amp that puts out at least 500RMS per channel, under $350? I know I don't really need that much but I've heard that you can drive these pretty hard and thats what I plan to do. It doesn't matter about the size of the amp cuz I've got space.

I've been looking at a Lanzar OPTI700X2

http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_42914_Lanzar-OPTI700X2.html

I know it's overkill but it's not CEA compliant and I've read that it produces only slightly less than what it says, even then I wouldnt turn it up too high. But a cheaper alternative would be nice.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

I will give out the same asnwer I always give out.

It's much easier to get a 4 channel and bridge it to get the power you want...it's also more flexible for when you decide to go active.


----------



## PrinceCharming (Aug 31, 2012)

I would prefer having a good solid 2-channel because I'm getting a separate 4-channel for my tweeters and speakers.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

So you are saying you can't have two 4 channels? Would your system then be to flexible or something? hehe


----------



## WhippingBoy (Dec 21, 2010)

Better than the Lanzar

Concerto Series C1600.2


----------



## D-Bass (Apr 27, 2012)

Hifonic Zues series used to have a 5-600rmsx2 amp. i never considered them SQ, but i never considered lanzar sq either.


----------



## PrinceCharming (Aug 31, 2012)

That concerto doesn't have quite enough power and I didnt really think Hifonics was much for SQ, the Lanzar Optidrive series as far as the amps go are supposed be pretty high quality.
I've been reading around a bit and have decided I should probably go with about 300-400RMSx2 of high quality, efficient, SQ. I would like to find one in the $250 range if possible.


----------



## donnieL72 (Jun 20, 2012)

I know that you're pretty dead set on a 2 channel amp, but you'll find more options in that power range by looking at bridging a 4 channel. In the future it will give you more options and flexibility and satisfy your power demands right now.

NVX 400x2 bridged NVX JAD800.4 Full Range Class D 4-Channel Car Amplifier

PPI 400x2 bridged Precision Power PPI BK 800.4 800W RMS, 4-Ch Class A/B Black Ice Car Amp

PPI 380x2 bridged Precision Power PPI S760.4 (S7604) Class AB 4-Channel Car Amplifier/Amp 

JBL 300x2 bridged JBL GTO1004 (GTO-1004) 600W RMS 4-Channel Grand Touring Amplifier

There are lots of others out there, you just neet to look around.

Personally, I am running a Boston Acoustics GT2200 200x2 into a pair of Massive Audio RK6's. These things are as power hungry as any 6 1/2" out there. It gives them all they want. 400 watts for each side of a 6 1/2" component set honestly is a bit of overkill. There are plenty of people that don't run 400 watts on a sub and they sound just fine.


----------



## JeremyC (Dec 20, 2007)

Who told you Lanzar was high quality? Genesis, Zapco and Audison are high quality. Lanzar??? 

Personally I would NEVER recomend Lanzar to someone. They might have gotten a little better over the last few years. But i will always remember them as a high failure rate flee market brand. 

IMHO you can do better for the money. JBL, Sundown, JL, Alpine, PPI. There are a lot of brands I would put before them. Especially if you want to drop your RMS rating down closer to what the speakers are recomended at. 

Speaking of RMS ratings, I have another question. Your comp set is rated for 150 watts RMS. Why do you want an amp that will put out 3 times that?

I could see 50 "maybe" 100 watts RMS over the rating of your comp set, if you were trying for some extra head room. But 350 watts over their RMS rating? Thats asking for trouble unless you've been doing this for a while. 

I just noticed your post saying you want something in the 250 to 300 watt RMS rating. Thats still a lot of power. Unless there is something I'm missing when it comes to that comp set.


----------



## AfterFx Customs (Aug 21, 2012)

500W RMS on a 2ch amp for $350? uhm.. probabaly not gonna happen.
look at an audison voce av duo. its 260Wx2, so RMS will be around 100 to 130.
its a clean sounding amp.
if you want great sound i would buy a McIntosh 4ch amp and run the drivers "active", having no loss in output from the amp.
you'll never buy another amp again.


----------



## eggyhustles (Sep 18, 2008)

AfterFx Customs said:


> if you want great sound i would buy a McIntosh 4ch amp and run the drivers "active", having no loss in output from the amp.
> you'll never buy another amp again.


lol

Right..


----------



## eggyhustles (Sep 18, 2008)

PrinceCharming said:


> I would prefer having a good solid 2-channel because I'm getting a separate 4-channel for my tweeters and speakers.


how many speakers do u have in your front stage?


----------



## PrinceCharming (Aug 31, 2012)

Thanks for the input everybody. I know Lanzar isnt known for quality anymore but their Optidrive series is supposed to be very high quality (the amps are anyways). I've been reading about these for weeks now and I've read nothing bad about them, they are Lanzar's only good line. And as far as that component set goes, ive read I don't know how many reviews that say they can handle way more than their RMS and actually could use at least 250-300. They are VERY power hungry. And 'eggyhustle' I have a two speakers and two tweeters on my front stage, it's a stock component set I guess, because they are wired like a component set but without a crossover. It's in a 2002 Pontiac Grand Am SE. And no, I haven't been doing this for very long so I'm basing everything on what I've read from forum reviews to professional articles on car audio. I know i would get more flexibility out of a 4-channel but I would prefer not to have to bridge to get the power I need because I've heard that bridging creates some distortion and extra heat, it's not much but I want as little as possible. Again this is not from experience so I could deffinately be over thinking things. Can someone please clear these things up for me and help me find a good amp, whether it be 4 or 2 channel I want at the very least 400w RMS because I want a good bit of headroom so that I can drive them hard when I want to.


----------



## PrinceCharming (Aug 31, 2012)

Then again if what I want isnt possible within my budget then so be it., I will just go with the Lanzar.


----------



## rc10mike (Mar 27, 2008)

Look for a Soundstream HRU.2. Its rated at [email protected] But its discontinued and very hard to find...


----------



## Horsemanwill (Jun 1, 2008)

i'm still trying to figure out why you want sooo much overhead. i mean i can understand a lil power but the speakers are 150rms/600peak. imo most you'd really want is abotu 200 watts. why the 500? explain to me this.


----------



## JeremyC (Dec 20, 2007)

PrinceCharming said:


> And 'eggyhustle' I have a two speakers and two tweeters on my front stage, it's a stock component set I guess, because they are wired like a component set but without a crossover.


If you don't have a x-over, a two channel amp will not work in this situation. 

You either need a passive x-over to put between the speakers and the amp, or 4 channel amp AND an electronic x-over to put between the amp and the head unit. 

And I'm going to ask again, as the person before me did. Why so much power? Power hungry is one thing, but almost 3 times the RMS is going to get you in trouble.


----------



## rexroadj (Oct 31, 2008)

JeremyC said:


> If you don't have a x-over, a two channel amp will not work in this situation.
> 
> You either need a passive x-over to put between the speakers and the amp, or 4 channel amp AND an electronic x-over to put between the amp and the head unit.
> 
> And I'm going to ask again, as the person before me did. Why so much power? Power hungry is one thing, but almost 3 times the RMS is going to get you in trouble.



What he means by "stock" component set is he is using the passives that came with the set.

Why the power.....First off I could write a book about these speakers......in fact if you search...I kind of did 

They reach there full potential with gobs and gobs of power. I ran about 500 to mine and it was amazing! (bridged HRU.4 and REF4.920 at different times) Ran them active off same 4 channels, ran active with about 200 to each mid and 120 to each tweet with different two channel amps....ran them off a rockford t600.2 with passives......did it all with these speakers....... All sounded amazing.... Bridged off the 4.920 was probably my favorite combo with them! Had that comp set for MANY years! Hell they even survived a truck fire! 

I still get countless PMs about the 608s and everyone always starts out the same........ 150 or so watts and really likes them......they dont get the same description I had with mine then they go out and run more power.....Different ball game! Anyone that has used them and done this will absolutely stand behind that! They are a unique comp set for sure!

Dont buy the lanzar......500x2 does not exist, certainly not for the tiny handful of amps that truly exist and your budget. I can only think of about 5 or so that can really do the 500x2 and most are long gone, and they did and still do cost about 7x's your budget. Get something like the REF4.920 keep it ventilated and go bridged. It will get warm..... Plus the great thing about the ref amps is you can go active from the xovers on the amp!!!! NEVER a bad option! 
If you ever decide to go active or even 3way active fronts......The a/d/s 344is is a spectacular midrange that goes with this set like it was made together!!!! Probably the best budget 3 way set I have ever dreamed of using! Keep the 4.920 for the tweets and midrange and the big 2 channel 190ish x2 for the mids or get the midsize 4 to bridge to the mids! Tons of SUPER clean volume to be had


----------



## robert_wrath (Apr 24, 2011)

Arc Audio - SE2300
Arc Audio SE 2300


----------



## JeremyC (Dec 20, 2007)

PrinceCharming said:


> it's a stock component set I guess, because they are wired like a component set but WITHOUT A CROSSOVER.


Are you sure he has the x-over?


----------



## vactor (Oct 27, 2005)

i have 3 bnib MB Quart QAA2500 amps i am trying to sell. beastly and awesome!! class A/B, a bit on the large side, but SERIOUS high end power indeed!


----------



## rexroadj (Oct 31, 2008)

JeremyC said:


> Are you sure he has the x-over?


NO, but in the first post he said he was using the 608system.System would imply all parts...ie:xovers.....he's a little all over the place though?
LOL!!!!


----------



## oilman (Feb 21, 2012)

There's plenty off 2 channels that will do 500 bridged. Just get two of them.


----------



## PrinceCharming (Aug 31, 2012)

rexroadj THANK YOU! You are the first person so far that has agreed with me so far (also the first person to post on one of my threads to use one of them, coincidence? I think not!). That Lanzar will do slightly less what it's rated (I'm assuming) because someone tested the OPTI500X2 and it did about 400x2RMS. And as far as what I ment with my "stock" front stage is my factory Grand Am system is still in there and is running off my Pioneer HU, they are wired together like a passive crossover but there is no visible crossover. That is the way they were when I got the car. The JBL's on the other hand I will have the passive crossover but I'm still deciding whether to go active or passive, active seems like a pain in the arse and I'm not really sure exactly what I need to do it because I have planned to run passive, but the passive seems like it could waste some power and it won't give me the best SQ. Could someone give me wiring diagram or a list of things I need when running active with these? I don't want to use the amps x-over because that limits my options even more.

Yes I am all over the place, sorry bout that but every time I post my set up and questions change because someone tells me something new or a better way to do things.


----------



## spl152db (Dec 20, 2007)

You read his post wrong. He said DON'T buy the Lanzar. I'm saying you should pull the stock speakers. Pointless to keep them in there. They won't make it sound any better. 

As far as the lanzar, you'd need 2000x2 to get a clean enough signal and I still wouldn't trust it. 

There are some zed 2 channels for sale in the classifieds that put out 250 each side at 4 ohms and 500 at 2ohms. That amp would probably be all you'd ever need. 

also bridging does cause an amp to get hotter, but again you're looking at a lanzar. You're going off of what people have said who have bought them. I don't consider someone buying a lanzar to really understand what quality means and sounds like. You will be able to cook an egg on the lanzar. 

and oh brinding doesn't induce distortion unless your amp really has a problem.


----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

robert_wrath said:


> Arc Audio - SE2300
> Arc Audio SE 2300


Pretty much one of the best 2 channels around.


----------



## PrinceCharming (Aug 31, 2012)

When I said that he agreed with me I ment about the power the JBL's can handle, not the Lanzar amp. And I should have specified, I don't have the JBL set yet so I can't/not going to pull my stock speakers yet, I'm trying to get this all planned out before I start buying.


----------



## PrinceCharming (Aug 31, 2012)

That SE2300 is way out of my budget.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

PrinceCharming said:


> That concerto doesn't have quite enough power and I didnt really think Hifonics was much for SQ, the Lanzar Optidrive series as far as the amps go are supposed be pretty high quality.
> I've been reading around a bit and have decided I should probably go with about 300-400RMSx2 of high quality, efficient, SQ. I would like to find one in the $250 range if possible.


Lmaooo are you saying Lanzar IS for sq?


----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

I would save up and get something you know is proven. You may get lucky if you search for something used.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

PrinceCharming said:


> Yes I am all over the place, sorry bout that


Noticed. 

I still don't get why you don't just bridge a 4 channel. You never explained your objection to that. You also said you don't want to use the amp's crossover because it will limit your options, but that doesn't make sense to me either.

This is a very confusing thread. The quality of the amp is not going to matter a whole lot in this particular application, because those speakers can't _sustain_ 500w. They're just not designed to handle that with any kind of duty cycle. 500w amp for dynamics? Sure, whatever floats your boat. But 500w transients aren't going to heat up an amp. :laugh: You'll be more than fine with a middle-of-the-road amp for this, even one without high current capability (which is why I think a bridged 4ch would be a good option for this application).


----------



## PrinceCharming (Aug 31, 2012)

My objection to the 4-channel bridged is that I don't want it overheating or distorting but I've looked it up and it doesn't matter because it's all close enough bridged or not. I can go with a 4-channel, the PPI P900.4 which I have heard very good reviews about. The only problem I have with it is that it is a class D and I don't know if it will be nearly as good as a class AB like the PPI BK800.4. The reason i want the class D is efficiency so i dont have to upgrade my alternator.
Btw that particular comp set CAN handle the 500w that I want to give it, I've read plenty of reviews by people who have these that say they are pushing 400-500RMS each and have had no problems.


----------



## trumpet (Nov 14, 2010)

If you can find the P900.4 for sale new, not used, let us know. That amplifier has supposedly been just about to come back in stock in the US for months after they sold out nationwide.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

PrinceCharming said:


> My objection to the 4-channel bridged is that I don't want it overheating or distorting but I've looked it up and it doesn't matter because it's all close enough bridged or not.


I see. Well, a reasonably designed amp will not distort while bridged, and it sure as hell ain't gonna overheat before that speaker would. 

I think you're looking for something that's far more robust than it needs to be IMO. You want high power, that's fine, but it's not going to be a demanding job for an amplifier to power that thing.



> I can go with a 4-channel, the PPI P900.4 which I have heard very good reviews about. The only problem I have with it is that it is a class D and I don't know if it will be nearly as good as a class AB like the PPI BK800.4. The reason i want the class D is efficiency so i dont have to upgrade my alternator.
> Btw that particular comp set CAN handle the 500w that I want to give it, I've read plenty of reviews by people who have these that say they are pushing 400-500RMS each and have had no problems.


You can have a 500w amp running a speaker, but that doesn't mean you're delivering 500w to the speaker...


----------



## PrinceCharming (Aug 31, 2012)

Ok thanks, I get that you think it's too much but I don't, i wasn't asking someone to tell me that it was too much power, I was asking for some advice on a good amp to get for them. And if it turns out that it is too much when I get them then so be it I'll either turn it down or blow them.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

PrinceCharming said:


> My objection to the 4-channel bridged is that I don't want it overheating or distorting but I've looked it up and it doesn't matter because it's all close enough bridged or not. I can go with a 4-channel, the PPI P900.4 which I have heard very good reviews about. The only problem I have with it is that it is a class D and I don't know if it will be nearly as good as a class AB like the PPI BK800.4. The reason i want the class D is efficiency so i dont have to upgrade my alternator.
> Btw that particular comp set CAN handle the 500w that I want to give it, I've read plenty of reviews by people who have these that say they are pushing 400-500RMS each and have had no problems.


Just because a few reviews some random person online wrote after testing them for 30 minutes means its true. I can promise you if you run them at 500 RMS they will **** the bed. It wont be a question of will they.. the real question is when. And no need to worry about an alternator.. im 3000 watts deep with a stock alt and still runnin strong with absolutly NO light dimming what so ever. All i have is 2 decent size batteries.


----------



## Shadowmarx (Feb 12, 2012)

Gladen 250 600x2 rms bridged @ 4 ohms


----------



## ATOMICTECH62 (Jan 24, 2009)

I have been using JBL GTI comps for about 20 years and I can tell you that the tweeter protection circuit on the crossover will kick in once you reach around 100watts.
You will have to go active.
Also I have blown more than a few Gti mids when powering them with more then a 200wpc amp actively xovered at around 80hz.
FWIW.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

PrinceCharming said:


> Ok thanks, I get that you think it's too much but I don't, i wasn't asking someone to tell me that it was too much power, I was asking for some advice on a good amp to get for them. And if it turns out that it is too much when I get them then so be it I'll either turn it down or blow them.


I didn't say it was too much. I said you have a fundamental misunderstanding about what it means to power a speaker with a 500w amp, and what the concerns are (or are not).


----------



## cruzinbill (Jul 15, 2011)

You could go with a bridged 4ch and get 400x2 cea rated also NVX JAD800.4 Full Range Class D 4-Channel Car Amplifier

or another bridged 4ch for 500x2 http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_34755_Rockford-Fosgate-P1000X4D.html


----------



## Jroo (May 24, 2006)

I didnt see if the OP said he wanted new or used? I remember the older eclipse amps had some that would do over 250 4ohm easy, but had large footprints. They come up for sale often used. I have also seen the boston acoustic amps on closeouts cheap and they have a large 2 channel and it would be new. Back in the day I ran an alpine v12 that was a long as a surfboard on infinty beta seperates and it was clean, just would never give that amount of space up again.


----------



## spl152db (Dec 20, 2007)

MarkZ said:


> I didn't say it was too much. I said you have a fundamental misunderstanding about what it means to power a speaker with a 500w amp, and what the concerns are (or are not).


so basically you're backing out now and saying that yes 500 is too much and you set it up so that you don't use the full 500.. hmmm

The crossovers wouldn't handle 500 much less the speakers themselves. 50w is too much for most tweeters. 



Jroo said:


> I didnt see if the OP said he wanted new or used? I remember the older eclipse amps had some that would do over 250 4ohm easy, but had large footprints. They come up for sale often used. I have also seen the boston acoustic amps on closeouts cheap and they have a large 2 channel and it would be new. Back in the day I ran an alpine v12 that was a long as a surfboard on infinty beta seperates and it was clean, just would never give that amount of space up again.


he won't buy from the forum since he can't hear the wanging in person. But he will buy a new lanzar site unheard when everyone says no.


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

LMAO at SQ and modern production Lanzar being mentioned in the same thread!

Thanks for the laugh OP, it came at the perfect time.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

spl152db said:


> so basically you're backing out now and saying that yes 500 is too much and you set it up so that you don't use the full 500.. hmmm


Read, please. I never made a comment about that size amplifier being too big or too small, or setting it up in any particular way. I said that using a 500w amp does not mean that you deliver 500w to the speaker, or with any appreciable duty cycle. These things are determined by application and usage.

In other words, given the structure of most types of music (specifically, the dynamics and the energy content), it's unlikely that he would ever deliver 500w to that speaker in the same way that a typical user would to, say, a subwoofer. Armed with that knowledge, it should help guide the decision about what amp to get. If he chose to listen to the advice.

I'll use an analogy to help you understand how usage and application can dictate purchase decisions. You buy a Ferrari and need to know whether to install special tires to handle 150mph driving. If you plan on going 150mph in that Ferrari, it might be a good idea to buy those special tires. If you drive like an old lady in that Ferrari, the choice of tire is less important. Your purchase should be driven by the intended use, not the capabilities of the car.


----------



## spl152db (Dec 20, 2007)

MarkZ said:


> Read, please. I never made a comment about that size amplifier being too big or too small, or setting it up in any particular way. I said that using a 500w amp does not mean that you deliver 500w to the speaker, or with any appreciable duty cycle. These things are determined by application and usage.
> 
> In other words, given the structure of most types of music (specifically, the dynamics and the energy content), it's unlikely that he would ever deliver 500w to that speaker in the same way that a typical user would to, say, a subwoofer. Armed with that knowledge, it should help guide the decision about what amp to get.
> 
> I'll use an analogy to help you understand how usage and application can dictate purchase decisions. You buy a Ferrari and need to know whether to install special tires to handle 150mph driving. If you plan on going 150mph in that Ferrari, it might be a good idea to buy those special tires. If you drive like an old lady in that Ferrari, the choice of tire is less important. Your purchase should be driven by the intended use, not the capabilities of the car.


no, thats not a good analogy try again. 

how about this one. You're putting nos on your car or a turbo. Your rings and bottom end of the motor can only handle 500hp and 500tq before shattering to pieces. A 10psi turbo will bring you to 490 and 490. It's perfect! but you say, well someone on some forum said that if you throw 500psi at it, it really stands up and delivers 5000hp and 6000tq and doesn't blow up! When in reality if you ever breach 10psi you're done. No matter waht someone told you mechanical limits are mechanical limits. They didn't say it handles 150w RMS because they wanted to. Thats the mechanical limit. Tires are not directly related to mechanical breakage. Thats like saying I can build the box with single wall. but I could go double wall, but since I don't plan on pounding I should skimp and not do double wall or bracing. Sure it works, but don't expect to be able to reach full potential.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

spl152db said:


> no, thats not a good analogy try again.


It's a fine analogy. I'm sorry you didn't understand it.

I snipped your car engine analogy because I don't know anything about engines and wouldn't want to comment on it. Sort of like how you shouldn't comment on audio.


----------



## spl152db (Dec 20, 2007)

MarkZ said:


> It's a fine analogy. I'm sorry you didn't understand it.
> 
> I snipped your car engine analogy because I don't know anything about engines and wouldn't want to comment on it. Sort of like how you shouldn't comment on audio.


let me see if I can put this in a way you can undestand. 

you have a gallon jug. (thats your speaker) and you add water (thats your power) it only holds 150 watts (1 gallon) but someone said overfilling it with 500w (3.33 gallons) makes it awesome! If you force it in there, what happens? the gallon just will explode. 

Thanks have a nice day.


----------



## rexroadj (Oct 31, 2008)

Ok, is everyone done with the pissing contests? 
WE understand the Lanzar thing...... Fine! This guy was researching like the rest of the population does....Looking online and finding reviews on places like sonic etc.... Good reviews of the amps....does he know any different? NO.......He comes here to get an educated opinion on it and this is what some of you do to him? WOW! Pathetic! What happened to just trying to help the guy? Explain to him why the Lanzar may not be everything its cracked up to be based on the people writing the reviews? Why flame the poor guy? Just pathetic Diyma!

To the guy that blew all the gti mids and those that say these comp sets cant handle the power......LOL. So the fact that I ran my same set for a couple years (most of which) was either bridged off a ref 4.920 or HRU.4......about 500x2. Yes, I know that doesnt meant that it was "seeing 500" but power was always there if and when they wanted it/needed it. The results were amazing. Never had an issue? Must have been luck? Also ran over 200 a mid several times going active....Bottom line, is over a few years, I did everything you could do to them and they always were laughing at me the whole time. I have also installed and helped countless setups with these without issue! If you dont have REAL experience with this set........Dont talk about them! They are freaks of nature! Hell...just for ****s and giggles I made a little ported box for a pair of the mids to run as subs.....it was incredible what they were capable of. If you own them and have time.....try it! Funny as hell!


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

rexroadj said:


> To the guy that blew all the gti mids and those that say these comp sets cant handle the power......LOL. So the fact that I ran my same set for a couple years (most of which) was either bridged off a ref 4.920 or HRU.4......about 500x2. Yes, I know that doesnt meant that it was "seeing 500" but power was always there if and when they wanted it/needed it. The results were amazing. Never had an issue? Must have been luck?


I think your experience with not blowing them, and others' experience with blowing them, demonstrates my point perfectly. It's going to be highly user-dependent! _*Can*_ they be blown with a 500w amp, particular crossover settings, certain types of music, and a heavy hand on the volume knob? Absolutely! _*Will*_ they be blown just by hooking up a 500w amp? Not necessarily!

So, what's the difference? 500w is 500w, right? 

Only if you're listening to sine waves. Music is dynamic. The ratio of _peak_ energy (which guides our choice of amplifier size) and _average_ energy (which determines the thermal failure rate of amplifiers and speakers - and ears) is typically about 10:1. And by "typically", I mean it's a throw-the-hands-up guess that I pulled out of my ass, because real music has quiet parts, crescendos, sustained portions, etc. 

But even if we assume 10:1 for a moment, it means that even if you throw nice unclipped 500w peaks at that speaker, it's still going to only be dissipating about 50w over any period of time. 50w sustained is a lot of ****ing power -- don't get me wrong -- but it brings us back down to the numbers on the spec sheet.

Anyway, the point is: amplifier size and whether or not the speaker will blow are _not_ strongly related. The dumbass behind the volume knob has a bigger impact than anything else.

How much is to be gained by using a 500w amp on a small woofer is a matter of debate, which I'm not getting into.


----------



## rexroadj (Oct 31, 2008)

MarkZ said:


> I think your experience with not blowing them, and others' experience with blowing them, demonstrates my point perfectly. It's going to be highly user-dependent! _*Can*_ they be blown with a 500w amp, particular crossover settings, certain types of music, and a heavy hand on the volume knob? Absolutely! _*Will*_ they be blown just by hooking up a 500w amp? Not necessarily!
> 
> So, what's the difference? 500w is 500w, right?
> 
> ...


I wasnt arguing that....kinda took it as a No **** kind of thing...."Power amount" is rarely the issue for damage. Obviously anything can happen and is entirely user dependent..... Agree completely. My point was that it can be done with marvelous results and they were made for that. These are probably some of the most indestructible components made as far as giving a curve for error imo.

All your points are spot on...I just didnt see the need to get into it as I take those things as common sense....But probably excellent info for the OP to take note of for when he reads both sides.....So Thank you for the additions as they are very informative to the subject.


----------



## JeremyC (Dec 20, 2007)

MarkZ said:


> The "Person" behind the volume knob has a bigger impact than anything else.


That was my concern. 

I know a lot of the people here could hook a 500 watt amp to a mid, and not blow it. They understand what they are doing, and would set the gains (and volume knob) accordingly. 

But I'm still hesitant to suggest someone hook an amp capable of 500 watts rms to a 150 watt rms speaker. 

Let say he is new to car audio, and he doesn't set his gains right. Or he lets his friend who "swears he knows what he is doing" to set his gains, and they end up 3/4 the way up or his bass control cranked to the max. 

30 min later his speakers are toast, and he blames you for telling him the amp would be fine. 

My point is, just because it worked for you. Doesn't mean you should sugest it to everyone. Take into consideration their level of experiance, and how well they can control their own impulse to show off.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

Jeremy, he could use a 10,000 watt amp, and he's no more likely to blow the speakers than with a 500 watt amp. Ultimately, your ears tell you when to turn it down. And when it reaches ear-bleeding levels, the 10,000 watt amp and 500 watt amp are outputting the same power.

All "500 watt" means is that it's capable of up to 500 watts. You could buy an air conditioner that's 100k BTU, but that doesn't mean your house is going to be too cold. Your house will only be too cold if you set the thermostat too low.

Power level should NEVER be used as a limiter. That's how you introduce clipping, which produces distortion and only marginally decreases the _average_ power delivered to the speaker. There's only one audio device that should ever be used as a limiter. And that's a limiter.


----------



## JeremyC (Dec 20, 2007)

MarkZ said:


> Ultimately, your ears tell you when to turn it down. And when it reaches ear-bleeding levels, the 10,000 watt amp and 500 watt amp are outputting the same power.


Mark do you ever agree with anything someone says? Good lord man. 

We just said the same thing. We are in control of the volume. 

Not all of us, have the restraint to keep it at sane levels. Ears bleeding to us sucks. To a 18 year old with 5 buddies in the car its the coolest thing in the world. 

I do not know if the OP is that type of person. Thats just it, I don't know. 

I do know he was looking at Lanzar. And his post was all over the place. That lead me to beleive he was very new to car audio. Not an experianced installer with test tones, o-scopes, DMMs and the knowledge to setup and tune a high end system. 

And he agreed with me. He is very new to car audio.

So answer me this.

Lets say some 16 year old hooks a 500 watt amp to those components, cranks the gain, cranks the bass, cranks the treble, and starts showing off to his buddies. 

Whats going to happen to the speakers? 

Hell anyone can answer that question.


----------



## MiniVanMan (Jun 28, 2005)

MarkZ said:


> _average_ power




I was WAITING for you to trip up and say "RMS" somewhere. 

Yeah, I was watching. 

Wonder how many will understand the distinction?

I know I have no idea how much _RMS_ power it takes to blow any speaker.


----------



## Ole Skool (Mar 1, 2012)

POOF!


----------



## JeremyC (Dec 20, 2007)

MiniVanMan said:


> I was WAITING for you to trip up and say "RMS" somewhere.
> 
> Wonder how many will understand the distinction?


Its pretty simple. Average power takes into consideration the dynamics of music, when figuring the amount of power a speaker will see over x amount of time at x volume.

I'm not saying he is going to instantly fry the coil if he hooks that much power up. Speakers are an electro-mechanical device. So there is more things he can damage than just the coil.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

JeremyC said:


> Mark do you ever agree with anything someone says? Good lord man.
> 
> We just said the same thing. We are in control of the volume.
> 
> ...


No, we're not saying the same thing. In fact, we said completely opposite things.  And that's fine, I don't have any ill will towards anybody when I say, "no, here's how I see it..." Maybe people shouldn't personalize things so much.

To answer your question, if the 16 year old did the same thing you describe, but used a 100wpc amp instead of a 500wpc amp, he'd probably blow the speaker too. Or the amp. Or both. You don't need test tones, o-scopes, and DMMs to adjust your settings correctly. [In fact, those three tools are not worth using even for the experienced user.]

So, as much as you think we're in agreement, you obviously didn't agree with my last post -- where I said "amplifier size and whether or not the speaker will blow are _not_ strongly related."


----------



## MiniVanMan (Jun 28, 2005)

JeremyC said:


> Its pretty simple. Average power takes into consideration the dynamics of music, when figuring the amount of power a speaker will see over x amount of time at x volume.


Yeah, so what's RMS power then? Everybody but MarkZ keeps referring to RMS power. I don't know what RMS power is.


----------



## rexroadj (Oct 31, 2008)

MarkZ said:


> No, we're not saying the same thing. In fact, we said completely opposite things.  And that's fine, I don't have any ill will towards anybody when I say, "no, here's how I see it..." Maybe people shouldn't personalize things so much.
> 
> To answer your question, if the 16 year old did the same thing you describe, but used a 100wpc amp instead of a 500wpc amp, he'd probably blow the speaker too. Or the amp. Or both. You don't need test tones, o-scopes, and DMMs to adjust your settings correctly. [In fact, those three tools are not worth using even for the experienced user.]
> 
> So, as much as you think we're in agreement, you obviously didn't agree with my last post -- where I said "amplifier size and whether or not the speaker will blow are _not_ strongly related."


= PERFECT! Well put......I was going to put it in much simpler terms with regard to doing the same thing with 100 or 500w......but you beat me to it! 
Dont know why that concept is so hard for people to grasp?


----------



## JeremyC (Dec 20, 2007)

Root Mean Squared

Its the average amount of power an amp can continuously create.


----------



## spl152db (Dec 20, 2007)

MiniVanMan said:


> Yeah, so what's RMS power then? Everybody but MarkZ keeps referring to RMS power. I don't know what RMS power is.


The RMS voltage of a pure‡ sine wave is approximately .707*peak voltage. 
‡If the waveform isn't a pure sine wave (like a square wave or a signal with mixed sine waves of different frequencies or music), multiplying the peak times .707 will not give an accurate RMS value and therefore will not give an accurate indication of the work that the waveform can produce when driving a load. For more complex signals, you need a meter that will calculate the RMS value from a set of samples taken at regular intervals. One such device (the TRUE RMS voltmeter) is discussed below.
Basic Car Audio Electronics


----------



## JeremyC (Dec 20, 2007)

MarkZ said:


> In fact, those three tools are not worth using even for the experienced user.


So why does Mark Eldridge teach how to use an O-scope in his advanced sound quality class? 

Dude I have an o-scope. When it comes to setting input and output stages in a stereo, I have yet to find a simpler, or more efficient way to do it. 

If you know something better I'm listening.


----------



## MiniVanMan (Jun 28, 2005)

JeremyC said:


> Root Mean Squared
> 
> Its the average amount of power an amp can continuously create.


I know what RMS stands for. Does RMS power = Average power?? What's the difference. Where's your source for the definition of RMS power?? 



spl152db said:


> The RMS voltage of a pure‡ sine wave is approximately .707*peak voltage.
> ‡If the waveform isn't a pure sine wave (like a square wave or a signal with mixed sine waves of different frequencies or music), multiplying the peak times .707 will not give an accurate RMS value and therefore will not give an accurate indication of the work that the waveform can produce when driving a load. For more complex signals, you need a meter that will calculate the RMS value from a set of samples taken at regular intervals. One such device (the TRUE RMS voltmeter) is discussed below.
> Basic Car Audio Electronics


I didn't ask what RMS voltage is. I KNOW what RMS voltage is. I don't know what RMS "POWER" is.


----------



## spl152db (Dec 20, 2007)

MiniVanMan said:


> I know what RMS stands for. Does RMS power = Average power?? What's the difference. Where's your source for the definition of RMS power??
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't ask what RMS voltage is. I KNOW what RMS voltage is. I don't know what RMS "POWER" is.


power is another way to express Watts. It's actually part of Ohm's law.


----------



## MiniVanMan (Jun 28, 2005)

spl152db said:


> power is another way to express Watts. It's actually part of Ohm's law.


Thank you again. I understand how to derive power. Again, what I'm asking is what is "RMS POWER"? 

Three or four posts now and nobody has told me what RMS Power is. I've gotten the formula/equation for "RMS voltage", "Average Power", and "Power". All trying to educate me on what "RMS Power" is, but nobody is telling me what RMS POWER is.


----------



## spl152db (Dec 20, 2007)

MiniVanMan said:


> Thank you again. I understand how to derive power. Again, what I'm asking is what is "RMS POWER"?
> 
> Three or four posts now and nobody has told me what RMS Power is. I've gotten the formula/equation for "RMS voltage", "Average Power", and "Power". All trying to educate me on what "RMS Power" is, but nobody is telling me what RMS POWER is.


wtf are you trying to prove?

if RMS is the root mean squared and also the average voltage, it would be the average voltage used in the equation to figure out the watts at a specific resistance using ohms law.


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 12, 2008)

"RMS *power*" is "continuous power" phrased wrong.


----------



## MiniVanMan (Jun 28, 2005)

spl152db said:


> wtf are you trying to prove?
> 
> if RMS is the root mean squared and also the average voltage, it would be the average voltage used in the equation to figure out the watts at a specific resistance using ohms law.


Is that the technical definition of "RMS Power"?? Vrms * I = Prms? Or is it Vrms * Irms = Prms? 

I'm trying to Google it, and I can't find any technical journals that refer to RMS Power. The Audio Engineering Society (AES) is decidedly devoid of RMS Power specifications, formulas or even references to it. So, I'm asking you to please give me a recognized formula for RMS Power as stated by an internationally recognized governing body for engineering.



BeatsDownLow said:


> "RMS *power*" is "continuous power" phrased wrong.


Still a useless measurement for measuring an amplifiers output capability or a speakers ability to withstand power.


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

rexroadj said:


> Ok, is everyone done with the pissing contests?


Exactly... From the prior posts, it appears that the OP knows better than anyone else on the forum through his blind defense of the Lanzar Optidrive series.



PrinceCharming said:


> the Lanzar Optidrive series as far as the amps go are supposed be pretty high quality.





PrinceCharming said:


> Thanks for the input everybody. I know Lanzar isnt known for quality anymore but their Optidrive series is supposed to be very high quality (the amps are anyways). I've been reading about these for weeks now and I've read nothing bad about them, they are Lanzar's only good line.





PrinceCharming said:


> That Lanzar will do slightly less what it's rated (I'm assuming) because someone tested the OPTI500X2 and it did about 400x2RMS.


I think everyone is being t-spenced!:laugh:


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

JeremyC said:


> So why does Mark Eldridge teach how to use an O-scope in his advanced sound quality class?
> 
> Dude I have an o-scope. When it comes to setting input and output stages in a stereo, I have yet to find a simpler, or more efficient way to do it.
> 
> If you know something better I'm listening.



I can't answer for Mark Eldridge.

For gain setting, it makes no sense to calibrate to 0dB. This has been discussed ad nauseum, and I can direct you to some other threads if you want to know why this is. Basically, it AGAIN has to do with the fact that music is not a 100% duty cycle sine wave. [that seems to be a recurring theme in all our discussions... ]

Some prefer to calibrate to some other number, like -6dB or -10dB. But the fact that this is an arbitrarily chosen number means that there's no benefit to o-scope precision.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

spl152db said:


> power is another way to express Watts. It's actually part of Ohm's law.


It's actually not. Ohm's law defines the relationship between current, voltage, and resistance.

Watts is a unit of measure of power. It still doesn't tell us anything about what "RMS power" means, or why it would be an important quantity.


----------



## JeremyC (Dec 20, 2007)

MarkZ said:


> Some prefer to calibrate to some other number, like -6dB or -10dB. But the fact that this is an arbitrarily chosen number means that there's no benefit to o-scope precision.


I set all input and output stages with 1k 0db, except for the amps. I use -10db for them. 

And it’s not just some random number I pick out of the air. There is a reason behind it. 

0 dB Overlap No-clipping, but good amount of power unused +/- 0.1% THD
5 dB Overlap Minor, inaudible clipping (Good compromise) +/- 0.3% THD
10 dB Overlap Clipping is audible (Max. overlap to set gain) +/- 1.0% THD
15 dB Overlap Noticeable clipping is present +/- 10% THD

10 db of overlap gives me plenty of output, and keep clipping at a controlled amount. One that most people can't hear, even in the rare occasion I do decide to crank it up and play around.

To answer your question, here is why Mark uses an O-Scope. http://www.carsound.com/columns/eldridge/eld0008.shtml 

Gain Structure and Level Setting
This is the one topic that more competitors and high-end installers have been asking about than any other recently, and for good reason. It’s one of the most important parts of critical system tuning. And, if done improperly, it can have as much, if not more, negative effect on the sonic performance of the system than any other part of the tuning process. 

How often have we heard systems that sound compressed, have very little dynamic capability, high distortion levels, and the volume reaches levels too high to stand when the volume control is only 1/4 of the way up? It’s a pretty common practice to set a system’s gains at 1/2 to 3/4 up because that seems to be a good spot. Or, maybe we try to use our ears with some dynamic music and attempt to dial it in. While we may get really lucky and get it right by doing it this way, it really is almost impossible to do without using a good technique and some basic test equipment. 

Proper gain structure will give the system its highest possible signal-to-noise ratio, best dynamic range, full use of the volume control, and minimum distortion levels. It will ensure that your system’s performance isn’t degraded because one component is over or under driving the following component, and that all the components are working together most effectively. 

We don’t have the space in this column to cover all the specifics of performing a complete gain structuring sequence of a system. For that, you can check out the Autosound 2000 Tech Briefs. There are a couple of articles on gain structuring and level setting available through the Web site (www.autosound2000.com). Richard, David, and Patrick developed the technique several years ago, and I haven’t even heard of another technique that’s as simple, complete, and fast. It doesn’t matter how complex the system is, all that’s needed to level match any system is CD #104 from Autosound 2000 (about $15), and a small self-contained amplifier from Radio Shack (around $12). If you want to get really critical, an oscilloscope can be of great help, but it isn’t a requirement.

Essentially, you’ll play the specific tracks on the CD, listen to the output of each component through the little amplifier, and level adjust each component so that maximum level is reached without audible distortion. Even the most complex system can be completely level matched in under an hour. I know of several car audio systems considered to be among the best in the world that have been dramatically improved by using this technique. It’s so simple and effective it’s almost disgusting. Get the articles and give it a try! You’ll like it!


----------



## MiniVanMan (Jun 28, 2005)

MarkZ said:


> It's actually not. Ohm's law defines the relationship between current, voltage, and resistance.
> 
> Watts is a unit of measure of power. It still doesn't tell us anything about what "RMS power" means, or why it would be an important quantity.


I think he got lost in the land of Google. He was sure ready to tell me what RMS stood for, but has disappeared since his regurgitated nonsense has hit the dead end that Google will present him when looking up and investigating "RMS Power".


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

JeremyC said:


> I set all input and output stages with 1k 0db, except for the amps. I use -10db for them.
> 
> And it’s not just some random number I pick out of the air. There is a reason behind it.
> 
> ...


-10dB is a pretty good number for most people. I suspect mine is close to that too (probably lower). But still COMPLETELY arbitrary. There's too much variation in program material for you to arrive at a single number. The chart up there is a nice rule of thumb, but like all rules of thumb, it's an estimate and not very generalizable.

Mark Eldridge is right about how important level setting is. But he doesn't argue anywhere that I can see that you need to achieve precision to a particular reference level. There's a reason he doesn't. 

Edit: Here's a post from 5 minutes ago that does a better job of explaining it... http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/1708845-post30.html


----------



## MiniVanMan (Jun 28, 2005)

JeremyC said:


> I set all input and output stages with 1k 0db, except for the amps. I use -10db for them.
> 
> And it’s not just some random number I pick out of the air. There is a reason behind it.
> 
> ...


Setting gain is to set max power before clipping at a given frequency. The point in all of this is that musical power is dynamic, and there's no way to accurately set a proper gain for something as dynamic and diverse as music, especially when considering dynamic impedance loads. 

So, as MarkZ stated, +0 db, +10db, -10db, etc, etc is all arbitrary, and in the end generally meaningless. 

Your ears are going to tell you more than an o-scope ever will.


----------



## PrinceCharming (Aug 31, 2012)

Holy ****! This is not what I asked for! All I wanted was some advice on a good amp! Not "a pissing contest"! I am new so I have to go with pretty much whatever I hear an read. I "read" multiple reviews, opinions, and threads about the Optidrive series being a very solid, the only reason I keep defending the Optidrive series is because you guys are saying that Lanzar is crap, not the Optidrive series. I just wanted to get an opinion from someone who has actually USED the Optidrive series, not a bunch of people just saying Lanzar sucks.
I will probably not go with the Optidrive because I found something I like better. I'm going with a PPI P900.4 or a REF4.920 (if I can find a used one for a good price).

I know that if I don't get it tuned right then either it's going to blow up or it's gonna sound like **** and eventually blow up, i know some about it but I will figure that out when the time comes. All I wanted out of this thread, which I thought would be simple, is some advice/details on a good sounding efficient amp that will supply the power I want. I know you guys are saying I shouldn't drive that much power to it and i respect that because you guys have been doing this a lot longer than i have and have degrees in acoustics and engineering. I'm getting extra power because I want good dynamics and plenty of headroom, I'm gonna make sure I get the gain and eq's set right so I dont fry anything.

I'm new so I have to take someone elses advice, but I would prefer to take the advice of someone who actually has had this set up, and that's what I'm doing.


----------



## rexroadj (Oct 31, 2008)

PrinceCharming said:


> Holy ****! This is not what I asked for! All I wanted was some advice on a good amp! Not "a pissing contest"! I am new so I have to go with pretty much whatever I hear an read. I "read" multiple reviews, opinions, and threads about the Optidrive series being a very solid, the only reason I keep defending the Optidrive series is because you guys are saying that Lanzar is crap, not the Optidrive series. I just wanted to get an opinion from someone who has actually USED the Optidrive series, not a bunch of people just saying Lanzar sucks.
> I will probably not go with the Optidrive because I found something I like better. I'm going with a PPI P900.4 or a REF4.920 (if I can find a used one for a good price).
> 
> I know that if I don't get it tuned right then either it's going to blow up or it's gonna sound like **** and eventually blow up, i know some about it but I will figure that out when the time comes. All I wanted out of this thread, which I thought would be simple, is some advice/details on a good sounding efficient amp that will supply the power I want. I know you guys are saying I shouldn't drive that much power to it and i respect that because you guys have been doing this a lot longer than i have and have degrees in acoustics and engineering. I'm getting extra power because I want good dynamics and plenty of headroom, I'm gonna make sure I get the gain and eq's set right so I dont fry anything.
> ...


Very few threads on here dont go like this!!! Bare with it and welcome to Diyma! As much as many of these threads get derailed....there is often times (and in this case its true) great information to be had. It is a learning experience. Most people get fanatical because they have already lived it and are hoping to keep someone else from the pricey results that CAN happen.....Not all are good at presenting it that way. I'm sure a lot of it right now is like a foreign language.....thats ok. Baby steps! I'm sure if you have questions about any of it you can ask any of the posters and they will gladly explain it to you so that you grasp it as it can and will help you do your install correct the first go around. 
Education and diligence is key to any install! Remember deaden....when you think youve done enough? Do it again 

Good luck!


----------



## jbowers (May 3, 2009)

PrinceCharming said:


> Holy ****! This is not what I asked for! All I wanted was some advice on a good amp! Not "a pissing contest"! I am new so I have to go with pretty much whatever I hear an read. I "read" multiple reviews, opinions, and threads about the Optidrive series being a very solid, the only reason I keep defending the Optidrive series is because you guys are saying that Lanzar is crap, not the Optidrive series. I just wanted to get an opinion from someone who has actually USED the Optidrive series, not a bunch of people just saying Lanzar sucks.
> I will probably not go with the Optidrive because I found something I like better. I'm going with a PPI P900.4 or a REF4.920 (if I can find a used one for a good price).
> 
> I know that if I don't get it tuned right then either it's going to blow up or it's gonna sound like **** and eventually blow up, i know some about it but I will figure that out when the time comes. All I wanted out of this thread, which I thought would be simple, is some advice/details on a good sounding efficient amp that will supply the power I want. I know you guys are saying I shouldn't drive that much power to it and i respect that because you guys have been doing this a lot longer than i have and have degrees in acoustics and engineering. I'm getting extra power because I want good dynamics and plenty of headroom, I'm gonna make sure I get the gain and eq's set right so I dont fry anything.
> ...


An option to consider if you want to throw a lot of power to your mids and still power your tweets from one amp is the Zed Leviathan. It's a six channel amp, and you're looking at about 600w x 2 bridging four of the channels leaving you with 190 for the remaining pair on the tweets. It's got advanced enough crossovers built in to make sure your speakers aren't getting anything that won't make them happy, and with careful tuning you'll be fine.


----------



## PrinceCharming (Aug 31, 2012)

Lol thanks man! Yeah I noticed there was plenty of useful info, still having a little trouble understanding it all tho. I've seen things like that happen in many threads, they are just trying to help, but going about it the wrong way.


----------



## gtsdohcvvtli (Aug 17, 2011)

On topic lol:

MOSCONI America | AS 300.2

Or

MOSCONI / GLADEN AUDIO America | Mosconi Zero 1

Or

MOSCONI / GLADEN AUDIO America | Mosconi Zero 3


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

PrinceCharming said:


> Lol thanks man! Yeah I noticed there was plenty of useful info, still having a little trouble understanding it all tho. I've seen things like that happen in many threads, they are just trying to help, but going about it the wrong way.


Not everybody is trying to help. It's a discussion forum. The point is discussion. We're not help desk employees. If a post doesn't pertain to your specific problem, you don't have to read it! Or you could read it and try to learn something. Teach a man to fish...


----------



## spl152db (Dec 20, 2007)

MiniVanMan said:


> I think he got lost in the land of Google. He was sure ready to tell me what RMS stood for, but has disappeared since his regurgitated nonsense has hit the dead end that Google will present him when looking up and investigating "RMS Power".


No I kinda got tired of you, but I ran across this paper, which may explain it. 

http://www.eznec.com/Amateur/RMS_Power.pdf

"The RMS value of power 
is not the equivalent heating power and, in fact, it doesn’t represent any 
useful physical quantity. The RMS and average values of nearly all waveforms 
are different. A notable exception is a steady DC waveform (of constant value), 
for which the average, RMS, and peak values are all the same. 
It should be noted that the term “RMS power” is (mis)used in the consumer audio 
industry. In that context, it means the average power when reproducing a single 
tone, but it’s not actually the RMS value of the power. "


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

MarkZ said:


> Teach a man to fish...


Give a man fire and he is warm for a day. Set that man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life!:laugh:


----------



## hirino (Aug 2, 2011)

i did not read read thru all the posts but op what is the definition of sq? if you are looking for amps that do rated power then lanzar, crescendo ,a.q. and a few others will do just fine .


----------



## SQ Audi (Dec 21, 2010)

PrinceCharming said:


> Thanks for the input everybody. I know Lanzar isnt known for quality anymore but their Optidrive series is supposed to be very high quality (the amps are anyways). I've been reading about these for weeks now and I've read nothing bad about them, they are Lanzar's only good line. And as far as that component set goes, ive read I don't know how many reviews that say they can handle way more than their RMS and actually could use at least 250-300. They are VERY power hungry. And 'eggyhustle' I have a two speakers and two tweeters on my front stage, it's a stock component set I guess, because they are wired like a component set but without a crossover. It's in a 2002 Pontiac Grand Am SE. And no, I haven't been doing this for very long so I'm basing everything on what I've read from forum reviews to professional articles on car audio. I know i would get more flexibility out of a 4-channel but I would prefer not to have to bridge to get the power I need because I've heard that bridging creates some distortion and extra heat, it's not much but I want as little as possible. Again this is not from experience so I could deffinately be over thinking things. Can someone please clear these things up for me and help me find a good amp, whether it be 4 or 2 channel I want at the very least 400w RMS because I want a good bit of headroom so that I can drive them hard when I want to.


This....smh I actually used the Lanzar OptiDrive amps in one of my installs back in 1995. It was a fair amplifier back then. I also compared it to an Orion XTR150 and the difference was night and day. The Orion was much more powerful and actually didn't get nearly as hot as the Lanzar. Lanzar was and is a good starting point for anyone looking to get some power to their speakers. As far as SQ, I wouldn't use the two in a sentence together. That is all. Carry on.

btw, to the girls having the pissing match over the O'scope, I have watched Mark Eldridge tune cars before, and every time I have seen him tune a car, he has used an O'scope to get the gains right before he did any changes to the settings of the crossover or equalizer.

Is it absolutely necessary? I wouldn't know, I am not a professional installer. But does it make sense? Absolutely. The O'scope can pinpoint exacting settings that the ear cannot.


----------



## squeak9798 (Apr 20, 2005)

spl152db said:


> No I kinda got tired of you, but I ran across this paper, which may explain it.
> 
> http://www.eznec.com/Amateur/RMS_Power.pdf
> 
> ...


You do realize that quote you found proved every point MVM was making, correct?


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

SQ Audi said:


> btw, to the girls having the pissing match over the O'scope, I have watched Mark Eldridge tune cars before, and every time I have seen him tune a car, he has used an O'scope to get the gains right before he did any changes to the settings of the crossover or equalizer.
> 
> Is it absolutely necessary? I wouldn't know, I am not a professional installer. But does it make sense? Absolutely. The O'scope can pinpoint exacting settings that the ear cannot.


Then I guess everybody should follow your lead and defer to others instead of using their own brain.


----------



## spl152db (Dec 20, 2007)

squeak9798 said:


> You do realize that quote you found proved every point MVM was making, correct?


I admit the crap I found first was wrong. I never said I was right. I was offering up options then I quit caring. I didn't go searching for this I found it unrelated. 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

SQ Audi said:


> This....smh I actually used the Lanzar OptiDrive amps in one of my installs back in 1995. It was a fair amplifier back then. I also compared it to an Orion XTR150 and the difference was night and day. The Orion was much more powerful and actually didn't get nearly as hot as the Lanzar. Lanzar was and is a good starting point for anyone looking to get some power to their speakers. *As far as SQ, I wouldn't use the two in a sentence together. * That is all. Carry on.


I got a good laugh out of that a few posts back:laugh:



ChrisB said:


> LMAO at SQ and modern production Lanzar being mentioned in the same thread!
> 
> Thanks for the laugh OP, it came at the perfect time.


I just didn't realize that the old ones were equally unimpressive.


----------



## SQ Audi (Dec 21, 2010)

MarkZ said:


> Then I guess everybody should follow your lead and defer to others instead of using their own brain.


Yes you should. All paths lead to my immaculate cognitive insight. Follow you must.


----------



## JeremyC (Dec 20, 2007)

SQ Audi said:


> Yes you should. All paths lead to my immaculate cognitive insight. Follow you must.


LMAO ;-)


----------

