list all 4 channels with staggered power outputs

[tcguy85 10+ year member]

tc guy is your amp for sale?

yes my zx550.2 and zx750.1 are both for sale now.

 

[UCF52 10+ year member]

yes my zx550.2 and zx750.1 are both for sale now.

what are you replacing it with? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[UCF52 10+ year member]

850.4 //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

 

[UCF52 10+ year member]

yea, the idea to me is to take the power from where it's not needed so much and put it where it may be needed more. tweeters don't need anywhere near the power of mids/mid-basses, so why have the same power available at all channels when it's really not needed.
first, let me say I AM a huge fan of headroom. but why have 200 or even 150 watts available for tweeters when they will most likely never need more than 50 watts EVER. save the extra power for the mids or mid-basses.

lets say you have a 4 channel that can do 150x4 on a set of component speakers run active. on music at high volumes the mids could see upwards of 100-150 watts, but the tweeters normally seeing maybe 25 watts or so (maybe a hair more). so why have over 100 watts extra there for the tweeters?

i am new to active setups, but already i can see having an amp that does 200x4 or even 150x4 not being the best way to go for it. i'd rather buy an amp that does 200 watts or so x2 for mids, then get a smaller one that does maybe 75 watts or so x2 for the tweeters. or simply go with a 4 channel that is staggered, it could possibly be less expensive and save space. but if it's not more inexpensive then i'll stick with running a big 2 channel and a smaller 2 channel to run an active front stage.

now sorry for the long post/possible rant.

I have to make a decision now. Two smaller amps or one large amp. I am thinking the two smaller amps, but I have to wait and see what vehicle I choose. Either way I get the 850.4 for next to nothing. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

 

[tcguy85 10+ year member]

what are you replacing it with? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

digital designs S4. 100x2 and 200x2.

 

[UCF52 10+ year member]

digital designs S4. 100x2 and 200x2.

I tried searching for a price, buy I came up short... how much?

EDIT - read your thread over on DIYMA. Nice pickup!!

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

don't care.

I care.

Threads in the general forums are not "WTB" threads. We have a specific forum dedicated to serve that purpose.

Posting the items you have for sale in threads in the general forums is considered spam. As such, continue and you will be temporarily banned as a warning. Continue after that and perma-ban is the likely repercussion.

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

lets say you have a 4 channel that can do 150x4 on a set of component speakers run active. on music at high volumes the mids could see upwards of 100-150 watts, but the tweeters normally seeing maybe 25 watts or so (maybe a hair more). so why have over 100 watts extra there for the tweeters?

Why pay essentially the same price for less available power ?

Like Jim said.....useless feature unless it's used in an effort to keep the cost of the unit down. And the amplifiers that do feature staggered outputs have no realistic cost advantage to them.

I see no real point in either the need or want for such an amplifier, at present, with the currently available options.

 

[tcguy85 10+ year member]

Why pay essentially the same price for less available power ?
Like Jim said.....useless feature unless it's used in an effort to keep the cost of the unit down. And the amplifiers that do feature staggered outputs have no realistic cost advantage to them.

I see no real point in either the need or want for such an amplifier, at present, with the currently available options.

i understand your point.

 

[jmanpc 5,000+ posts]

The Lightning Audio S2.500.4 (iirc) is staggered. Its 40x2 and 100x2 iirc. Good luck finding one, though. They're pretty rare nowadays.

And no, it's not your typical LA amp.

edit: found one

http://cgi.ebay.com/NIB-Lightning-Audio-S2-500-4-Amp-40W-x-2-100W-x-2_W0QQitemZ180020765568QQihZ008QQcategoryZ39739QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQtrksidZp1638.m118.l1247QQcmdZViewItem

 

[tcguy85 10+ year member]

The Lightning Audio S2.500.4 (iirc) is staggered. Its 40x2 and 100x2 iirc. Good luck finding one, though. They're pretty rare nowadays.
And no, it's not your typical LA amp.

edit: found one

http://cgi.ebay.com/NIB-Lightning-Audio-S2-500-4-Amp-40W-x-2-100W-x-2_W0QQitemZ180020765568QQihZ008QQcategoryZ39739QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQtrksidZp1638.m118.l1247QQcmdZViewItem

yea a guy on DIYMA just posted a link to those as well. interesting.

 

[UCF52 10+ year member]

Why pay essentially the same price for less available power ?
Like Jim said.....useless feature unless it's used in an effort to keep the cost of the unit down. And the amplifiers that do feature staggered outputs have no realistic cost advantage to them.

I see no real point in either the need or want for such an amplifier, at present, with the currently available options.

I think he is saying that having the staggered outputs is kinda useless. Basically you could get a powerful 4 channel and set the gains accordingly for each channel. Lets say the Kicker ZX850.4; That would be plenty of power for your mids and tweets. Although I do like the idea of the staggered 4 channel - but the idea is useless if they can't keep costs down, imo.

Man, get your quotes right. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

 

[tcguy85 10+ year member]

well i have a 2 way active setup and wanted to have 200 on tap for my mids. if i get a 4 channel why the need to have 200 on tap for the tweeters also when they will never see even 1/4 of that. it just seems pointless. also it'll make the footprint of the amp bigger as well, taking up extra space.

and yes i know 200 watts for mids run active might sound like overkill too, but if i ever swap out to 6 or 8 ohm mids and tweeters i'll still have enough power.

 

[skydeaner 10+ year member]

honestly i know the rsd mids when crossed over properly can play with 150-200rms on them, and i feel your pain. I dropped from 320 to 120 or so on them and it just isn't enough when i really wanna crank it. Really though for what you are needing i dont think a 4 channel with all that extra on hand for the tweeters would really be that bad. At 1/4 or less of it's available power the power supply of that section of the amplifier should be so stout and the output phase should be so clean i bet you will be able to tell a difference. Maybe not... I dunno, it is still hard to find an amp that fits those specs anyways. 200+ x2 and 100+ x2. Much easier to find 200+ x4 and then you have a brand choice at least.

 

[tcguy85 10+ year member]

honestly i know the rsd mids when crossed over properly can play with 150-200rms on them, and i feel your pain. I dropped from 320 to 120 or so on them and it just isn't enough when i really wanna crank it. Really though for what you are needing i dont think a 4 channel with all that extra on hand for the tweeters would really be that bad. At 1/4 or less of it's available power the power supply of that section of the amplifier should be so stout and the output phase should be so clean i bet you will be able to tell a difference. Maybe not... I dunno, it is still hard to find an amp that fits those specs anyways. 200+ x2 and 100+ x2. Much easier to find 200+ x4 and then you have a brand choice at least.

yea i went with a DD S4 though. can't wait!