tremor1127
10+ year member
Mental Member
for what exactly?
just in the car?
i think the rl-s is probably a little better all around except SPL maybe.
just in the car?
i think the rl-s is probably a little better all around except SPL maybe.
tremor1127
10+ year member
Mental Member
it would be schweet for HT though i bet. its not a great comparison. the Q is a bit more crude of a subwoofer than the rl-s...
RAM_Designs
5,000+ posts
SketchUp Master
yeah, definitely not in the same league IMO...nor the same class, really.
dalucifer
10+ year member
Not Minion Approved
RL-S is very hard to power. You need 1k+ at 4 ohms...It also needs a very large enclosure.. Honestly it was just designed for HT.. Can be used in a car audio environment, but not meant for it... The Q is much more suited for car audio..
tremor1127
10+ year member
Mental Member
i totally agree, but he didnt mention power...
tremor1127
10+ year member
Mental Member
oh, well that would be a disadvantage... //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif
tremor1127
10+ year member
Mental Member
both are awesome subwoofers for what they are designed for and how they are advertised.
if i had the direct choice though i would buy the rl-s for car audio or HT or whatever. its a good sub. sounds awesome for just about anything. it simply wont get boring like other "regular" subwoofers...
if i had the direct choice though i would buy the rl-s for car audio or HT or whatever. its a good sub. sounds awesome for just about anything. it simply wont get boring like other "regular" subwoofers...
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...
About this thread
