Thanks. I try. I should edit with a caveat that I have been called absolutely ignorant by unnamed (which is why I try to stay out of the political threads).
I married an Italian from Miami... LOL!! Someday she'll take her German/Swedish/Scottish mutt to Roma hopefully. But equally as cool as german chicks I think but feisty (understatement for the day).
Tuning and MS-8 in the same sentence? hehehe Ok, I guess it could happen, there is the 1/3 octave eq. LOL! I imagine soon there will be some reviews from "ears" that have actually heard the phantoms.. I may get brave, at least with the 1000.1 since I do have a nostalgic nice old Eclipse 3640 that wants to be used. 5-channel died so I'm in the hunt a bit but was originally considering stepping up.. XD or HD.
I married an Italian from Miami... LOL!! Someday she'll take her German/Swedish/Scottish mutt to Roma hopefully. But equally as cool as german chicks I think but feisty (understatement for the day).
Tuning and MS-8 in the same sentence? hehehe Ok, I guess it could happen, there is the 1/3 octave eq. LOL! I imagine soon there will be some reviews from "ears" that have actually heard the phantoms.. I may get brave, at least with the 1000.1 since I do have a nostalgic nice old Eclipse 3640 that wants to be used. 5-channel died so I'm in the hunt a bit but was originally considering stepping up.. XD or HD.
Right on! Feisty for sure. Germans tend to be conservative for the most part...
I have all my gains 100% off with a fully active system, so I still need to balance gains and work a little more with placement...
Right on! Feisty for sure. Germans tend to be conservative for the most part...
I have all my gains 100% off with a fully active system, so I still need to balance gains and work a little more with placement...
Speaking of.. That's about the only single criticism that I've read so far.. the gains. I'll be interested how Phantom gains play with the MS-8. Coinky-dink that you're running one. I imagine it's a non-issue but eh, anything interesting.
Trick with my system is running active with varying impedence drivers (6ohm D26NC05tweets, 8ohm tang band W6-789E relatively high-efficiency 90+db mids). Makes gains settings then auto-calibration interesting.. Though the results have been pretty good with the old ZX700.5 to be replaced, though maybe a bit enemic with a little hiss and grain.
But enough power, with the phantoms, in case I get crazy and put in those RK6 components on the shelf and get all SPLish. LOL Nice to have headroom.. joking.. I'm trying to go for SQ but with good dynamics.
Speaking of.. That's about the only single criticism that I've read so far.. the gains. I'll be interested how Phantom gains play with the MS-8. Coinky-dink that you're running one. I imagine it's a non-issue but eh, anything interesting.
Trick with my system is running active with varying impedence drivers (6ohm D26NC05tweets, 8ohm tang band W6-789E relatively high-efficiency 90+db mids). Makes gains settings then auto-calibration interesting.. Though the results have been pretty good with the old ZX700.5 to be replaced, though maybe a bit enemic with a little hiss and grain.
But enough power, with the phantoms, in case I get crazy and put in those RK6 components on the shelf and get all SPLish. LOL Nice to have headroom.. joking.. I'm trying to go for SQ but with good dynamics.
What a novel idea - an SQ system that dubs as an SPL system! lol Yeah, we all want that. Your varying impedances will not matter. You obviously must have level matched everything to some point. I start with getting xovers right and then level latch actively on the amps, through the MS-8. Then readjust xovers, then more adjusting until I get it right. Once I get it as flat as possible with proper xover point, then I proceed to tuning which is fairly easy with the MS-8 if you are not competing. Only the fine tuning is a bit of a bear and takes some real time...
I am really, REALLY likin' the look of the Rubicon!
Bret
PPI-ART COLLECTOR
Thanx man. I have a bazillion PMS requesting photos, but as I said, the install was a quicky and nothing impressive. Plus, this is a jeep, not an IQC/SQC vehicle. Don't want people to think I do not give a crap, ya know? I am working on new adjustable tweeter mounts and want to relocate my amplifiers to my secondary interior roll cage... That would be badass and worth showing...
In case it hasn't yet been linked or seen here.. Found this, by Gary who also did the PAS write-up. Was hoping he'd speak more about how she sounds but ok.. Some nice shots of the product though. In the PAS review article he mentioned more thoughts on performance later in "his blog", but I've found no such "blog".
In case it hasn't yet been linked or seen here.. Found this, by Gary who also did the PAS write-up. Was hoping he'd speak more about how she sounds but ok.. Some nice shots of the product though. In the PAS review article he mentioned more thoughts on performance later in "his blog", but I've found no such "blog".
Anybody that knows Gary, knows that while he is a very cool cat, he is not easy to please. I was a bit worried about what he would honestly think about fullrange Class D amplifiers, but he dug it...
In the PAS review article he mentioned more thoughts on performance later in "his blog", but I've found no such "blog".
A couple of days ago I spent about 60 seconds trying to find his blog. I tried checking the PAS staff listing and he's not in there. Dunno if this was a teaser for a "coming soon" blog or what.
Hey, Grizz, your "outreach" effort on this forum is the main reason I bought the P900.4. I have been a little leery of the old name-new owner outfits, but your obvious commitment to the enthusiasts is apparent. I am looking forward to installing my new Phantom amp this weekend. Thanks for taking the time to give us your news and views.
Yeah I made the mistake of trying to find whatever ellusive blog he was referring to as well. I'll never get those minutes back. :/
Indeed.. Let's read more of what Gary had to say about the P900.4 if he did a more in depth listen. The article teases the reader in thinking he was going to ellaborate more. Inquirin' minds wanna know. Granted what he "did" say was pretty nice though brief. You got that check off to him didn't ya Grizz? LOL!
Hey, Grizz, your "outreach" effort on this forum is the main reason I bought the P900.4. I have been a little leery of the old name-new owner outfits, but your obvious commitment to the enthusiasts is apparent. I am looking forward to installing my new Phantom amp this weekend. Thanks for taking the time to give us your news and views.
No man, thank you. I appreciate everybody's reviews and ideas. As I have said before, I want to build for you guys. It does not matter what I want or the company wants. It matter what YOU GUYS want. This is the only forum I go on because I get the opportunity to learn what you guys like. Obviously I cannot make bazillion dollar perfect products that everybody will want to buy at whore prices, but I try to accommodate whenever possible. I totally understand what you mean by the new owner thing. Look at what Coleman did to Soundstream. He literally destroyed it. We looked at that as an opportunity to buy a great, nostalgic name and rebuild it to what it was but with a modern flare which includes entry level products. Just trying to do the same thing now with PPI. Only problem is that we bought it during a recession, but it is growing well. And I still have some more trick up y sleeve...
...Only problem is that we bought it during a recession
Indian Motorcycles ran into that little issue as well.. Except they're selling premium-grade $34k+ versions of factory cruisers. Definitely a risk hoping for brand recognition with two hits 1) luxury item and 2) teensy tiny market even when everyone was on the harley bandwagon. Hopefully Polaris' muscle can help them ride the storm. Hate to see 'em fail again. Such beautiful bikes.
In 'luxury' consumer products, better-than-the-other-guy value in the right price-point, plus presence among your customers and potentials are two great tools in any industry. Good luck.
Yeah I made the mistake of trying to find whatever ellusive blog he was referring to as well. I'll never get those minutes back. :/
Indeed.. Let's read more of what Gary had to say about the P900.4 if he did a more in depth listen. The article teases the reader in thinking he was going to ellaborate more. Inquirin' minds wanna know. Granted what he "did" say was pretty nice though brief. You got that check off to him didn't ya Grizz? LOL!
Even if I was not as honest as the day is long, Gary would never take a check from anybody. Regardless of what brand and the test results, they are legit. I will always have Gary's back regardless of how surprising the results may be. Any surprise is solely based on either past experience or reputation, but Gary's results are always genuine, whether good or bad...
Well the PPI is slightly and what would appear to be inaudibly better. But I wouldn't be ready to say it measures better then the ALL the polks, I would think that the differences are just normal differences between amplifiers of the samel "model". IE 2 identical PPI's won't measure exactly the same.
We have seen it with amps that come with birth sheets, one pdx5 will have 90 watts, the next will have 110.
Ever thing MONEY TALKS? Hmm What if you were friends with the reviewer? You can only trust a review as much as you want.
I have seen reviews on many car audio items from CSR, CS,CA&E, AS&P, sure they are great to read but and it shows some specs and testing, but you can not trust it 100%
I've tested the PPI's, never the POLK's , but i would like too!
.
TEAM BOTTLEHEAD - US Distributor for AUDIBLE PHYSICS - TEAM MUSEE - TEAM PHD
Well the PPI is slightly and what would appear to be inaudibly better. But I wouldn't be ready to say it measures better then the ALL the polks, I would think that the differences are just normal differences between amplifiers of the samel "model". IE 2 identical PPI's won't measure exactly the same.
We have seen it with amps that come with birth sheets, one pdx5 will have 90 watts, the next will have 110.
Ok, say we wanted to rate amplifiers at .05% THD+n at 4 ohms instead of 1%. The PPI does 130w, while the Polk does 50w. That 's a huge difference. I guess what I'm trying to say is that the THD+N distribution looks very different in one amplifier versus the other. If they were truly the same I would expect the distribution to be the same at least.
I agree that the comparison only stands between the 4 channel models.
Ever thing MONEY TALKS? Hmm What if you were friends with the reviewer? You can only trust a review as much as you want.
I have seen reviews on many car audio items from CSR, CS,CA&E, AS&P, sure they are great to read but and it shows some specs and testing, but you can not trust it 100%
I've tested the PPI's, never the POLK's , but i would like too!
.
All data can be fudged. Unless you do everything yourself and you are unbiased nothing is 100% bias free with certainty.
From what I can tell I've seen data that looks really bad, like the Utopia BE line Klippel where the reviewers subjectively gave it a better score than they should have. The data itself looked pretty bad and CA mag still posted it. I keep that in mind and skip all the subjective bullshit. Generally I think if the tester is smart enough to get results he's not gonna fudge it. Science is often hand in hand with honesty, and I believe it's one of it's major tenets. The editor might come in and say drop this test, and speak nicely about it but the data that does make it is honest imo. Of course I can't guarantee it but that's my gut feeling. If you can't read raw data and read the story instead you are trully missing out on a lot of these tests, and the subjective and objective sometimes disagree.
The thing I've been wondering is whether or not there would be any debate about them if the price was considerably higher? When I was a teenager in the mid 90's PPI was expensive. People are so used to getting what they pay for, particularly with electronics. When I see a great price on something I can't help but be sceptical.
But don't raise the price, there needs to be something out there that is actually worth more than you have to pay for it lol
Ok, say we wanted to rate amplifiers at .05% THD+n at 4 ohms instead of 1%. The PPI does 130w, while the Polk does 50w...
And that's where people would start talking about "REAL" watts and how the polk amp is using 50 real watts and are way better then some other compagnies regular "watts".
It really doesn't matter at what level distortion -under hearing threshold- it makes it's power at.
Point remains though is that measure another polk and it might measure just like the PPI, and the next PPI might measure like the polk does. Production variations.
And that's where people would start talking about "REAL" watts and how the polk amp is using 50 real watts and are way better then some other compagnies regular "watts".
It really doesn't matter at what level distortion -under hearing threshold- it makes it's power at.
Point remains though is that measure another polk and it might measure just like the PPI, and the next PPI might measure like the polk does. Production variations.
Except here I am rating them by the same measuring stick so to say. You can call that both in Polk watts or both in PPI watts. The key is that measuring both by the same criteria results look very different at .05 THD. The difference in distortion "pattern" is very large from what I can tell between the two. If these were production variations of the same board would you notice such different results? I'm not an amp buff, maybe you would.
I can make a poor analogy, but maybe it will highlight my point. Car engines dyno differently as well. One Corvette engine could do 505hp as rated, while another Corvette can be at 520hp. However, and this is my point, the torque curve will look largely the same, just shifted a bit. I know I'm looking at the same engine's dyno by the way the torque curve looks, a near perfect shift. If I were to look at a small Honda motor with a turbocharger making 510hp I would know that dyno is of a different engine because the distribution is that different.
When I look at these amplifier tests the distortion patters look very different. I understand 10w difference at 1%THD can be a production variation but the way that THD slopes by output is vastly different. The PPI is much more desirable. In fact I'd take the PPI if it made the same power but had that nicer distortion pattern. It's noticeably cleaner from 35w all the way to 150w.
Sadly I've never seen THD vs Watts for the same amplifier in a repeated sampling context. We could get an idea of whether distributions can be different for the same design.
Well the PPI is slightly and what would appear to be inaudibly better. But I wouldn't be ready to say it measures better then the ALL the polks, I would think that the differences are just normal differences between amplifiers of the samel "model". IE 2 identical PPI's won't measure exactly the same.
We have seen it with amps that come with birth sheets, one pdx5 will have 90 watts, the next will have 110.
True, but that is a huge swing. A few watts is one thing, but a big swing means low tolerance parts...
Ever thing MONEY TALKS? Hmm What if you were friends with the reviewer? You can only trust a review as much as you want.
I have seen reviews on many car audio items from CSR, CS,CA&E, AS&P, sure they are great to read but and it shows some specs and testing, but you can not trust it 100%
I've tested the PPI's, never the POLK's , but i would like too!
.
Hence my last statement. Back in the day when we actually had several American magazines, I would not doubt if reviews could have been detoured by monetary incentive. As for Gary? NOT A FREAKING CHANCE! Good or bad, he is a straight shooter. he has said a couple things that were not favorable to me in reviews, but they were legit. Nothing major, but true...
Re: New PPI amps (Phantom & Black Ice)
I should edit with a caveat that I have been called absolutely ignorant by unnamed (which is why I try to stay out of the political threads).
Linear Mode
