Sony ES C-90 or Rockford 8250?

[gentlejax 10+ year member]

I am selling my Eclise 8454 and going with something simplier. These are my 2 choices for sound quality within my price range. Not sure If I can find a 8250 but I know I can find a C-90.

anyone know the voltage out on the C-90? havnt found that out yet.

I dont need a deck with all the extra eq's and time alignment and all that stuff. I want a good deck with the basics mostly

Click to read more...

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

i have my c-90 hooked up to the 4000 so as far as using what it on the deck im no help there. the c-90 doesnt clip at all due to its volume control. http://www.matronics.com/xdp4000x/#DSC has a ton of info mailing/message list to people with more info on the units than you can shake a stick at lol. iirc the unit is 4 v out with output impedence of 55 ohms.

 

[johnecon2001 5,000+ posts]

I believe the rockford is pretty simple. I have no first hand experience with either though. But I know the Sony still has all of the good time alignment and fun eq's.

JLCivic has the Rockford unit.

audiolife has the Sony.

Hopefully they'll see this thread and come shed some light.

edit: see?

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

I believe the rockford is pretty simple. I have no first hand experience with either though. But I know the Sony still has all of the good time alignment and fun eq's.
JLCivic has the Rockford unit.

audiolife has the Sony.

Hopefully they'll see this thread and come shed some light.

a nakid c-90 doesnt have the bells and whistles you need the xdp-4000x with a lap top running win 98 or 98 se .

 

[3.5Max6spd 10+ year member]

simple deck? try the nak's, plus they are more current....

 

[MrBlack 10+ year member]

Here's a biased opinion. C-90 all the way. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/cool.gif.3bcaf8f141236c00f8044d07150e34f7.gif

And on a side note Audiolife, the 4000x's software works fine with newer versions of Windows. I use a laptop that's less than a year old that has no serial port. I'm running XP Home and use a USB>Serial adapter and it communicates just fine with my 4000x.

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

And on a side note Audiolife, the 4000x's software works fine with newer versions of Windows. I use a laptop that's less than a year old that has no serial port. I'm running XP Home and use a USB>Serial adapter and it communicates just fine with my 4000x.

His home PC disagrees with you //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/tongue.gif.6130eb82179565f6db8d26d6001dcd24.gif

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

Here's a biased opinion. C-90 all the way. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/cool.gif.3bcaf8f141236c00f8044d07150e34f7.gif
And on a side note Audiolife, the 4000x's software works fine with newer versions of Windows. I use a laptop that's less than a year old that has no serial port. I'm running XP Home and use a USB>Serial adapter and it communicates just fine with my 4000x.

actualy 4 comps with xp and xp pro would disagree lol and on 4kcontrol site i wasnt the only one that had problems

 

[MrBlack 10+ year member]

I will agree that it can be tricky to get right, but I've had my 4000x for years, and over 3 laptops running Windows versions 98 and XP, I've been able to get them all to work with it in a matter of minutes.

The trick is with reconfiguring the assigned comm port of the adapter you are using to coincide with one that the DSC software is looking for. Sometimes there are hardware conflicts, since the DSC software can only utilize comm ports 1-4, so you have to remove any other hardware that is already using those ports.

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

it corupted a dll that dsc needed to work. it would open then close right up after the 3 or 4th time you used it

 

[HiAmplidude 10+ year member]

edit - repost

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

its 4 v i already told him that up there i know the output impedence is low just not sure if its 55 ohm or somewhere down those lines and it doesnt clip

 

[MrBlack 10+ year member]

I swear it's worked across mutliple laptops of mine. Two of them were native in Windows XP and the other I was running multiple operating systems with 98 and XP on separate partitions. I found that with XP it was actually easier to get things to work right. I have no reason to make this up.

Did you try running the DSC program with the Windows 98 compatibility mode enabled? (Right click on the executable file, click properties, select the compatibility tab and highlight Windows 98/ME)

If enabling compatibility mode doesn't work for you, it sounds to me like some other hardware you have installed or something else you have running in the background is causing a conflict, because Windows XP has worked fine for me.