Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Spkrman" data-source="post: 1101757" data-attributes="member: 548682">I was as objective as possible in the SQ tests... Simply put, the RL-P didn&#039;t hit with as much accuracy as the type R (on the 45hz-50hz stuff) and not even close to the type S overall.&nbsp; It hits hte notes or it doesn&#039;t... thats all I was interested in.&nbsp; The woof didn&#039;t have the &quot;big&quot; presence that either of the others had, mostly because it wasn&#039;t loud.Lets not forget only one coil on the R was connected... I&#039;m sure that didn&#039;t help things, but it could have //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif.Whether you like it or not, the test was very subjective... you said it yourself... in a similar box the RL-P sounded bad.&nbsp; So live with it, in this box it sounds bad.&nbsp; I&#039;m not done yet, I&#039;m going to test a smaller lower tuned box later today.&nbsp; I EXPECT more SQ out of the RL-P... but the SPL numbers so far are just depressing... I am maxing the woof out and it barely breaks a 40.&nbsp; To me, thats not acceptable and thats NOT a good daily driver.&nbsp; You should never have to max the woof to break a 40... the type R breaks a 40 without even much movement, let alone struggle.Yet the Rl-P is still better?&nbsp; We&#039;ll see what happens later today.The RL-P was a power handling wuss, it didn&#039;t even come close.&nbsp; It handled as much as the alpine type S and wasn&#039;t nearly as loud doing it.The RL-P DOES need this power to even to to a respectable volume level!&nbsp; Thats what the test has shown so far... it *doesn&#039;t* get *nearly* as loud as it should.&nbsp; While doing a 140 is was cryin... i&#039;d say 137 is the level where it sounded pretty good, and thats just not loud enough.... not in an SPL box in a 2 door blazer.SQ tests were objective, like it or not.You said it yourself the RL-P didnt like the bigger box... so stand by what you say, dont make excuses for why it doesn&#039;t sound as good!My test so far as agreed with you, yet you still call BS....I didn&#039;t suggest it, I&#039;m the one performing the test.Power doesnt matter to the SQ test, makes 0 difference.&nbsp; I didnt&#039; just crank it and say ew... I played at various levels with lots of different material.I couldn&#039;t get the amp to the point of clipping with the RL-P... it cried before I could come close, so thats out the door.If the R wins, it deserves to win.&nbsp; The test is flat out subjective.Which btw... if you look at the results, the type S is the overall leader so far, didn&#039;t expect that did you?To me, it will be whatever I test to be the best.&nbsp; Brand, rating... NOTHING matters to me except RESULTS!!!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Spkrman, post: 1101757, member: 548682"] I was as objective as possible in the SQ tests... Simply put, the RL-P didn't hit with as much accuracy as the type R (on the 45hz-50hz stuff) and not even close to the type S overall. It hits hte notes or it doesn't... thats all I was interested in. The woof didn't have the "big" presence that either of the others had, mostly because it wasn't loud. Lets not forget only one coil on the R was connected... I'm sure that didn't help things, but it could have [IMG]//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif[/IMG]. Whether you like it or not, the test was very subjective... you said it yourself... in a similar box the RL-P sounded bad. So live with it, in this box it sounds bad. I'm not done yet, I'm going to test a smaller lower tuned box later today. I EXPECT more SQ out of the RL-P... but the SPL numbers so far are just depressing... I am maxing the woof out and it barely breaks a 40. To me, thats not acceptable and thats NOT a good daily driver. You should never have to max the woof to break a 40... the type R breaks a 40 without even much movement, let alone struggle. Yet the Rl-P is still better? We'll see what happens later today. The RL-P was a power handling wuss, it didn't even come close. It handled as much as the alpine type S and wasn't nearly as loud doing it. The RL-P DOES need this power to even to to a respectable volume level! Thats what the test has shown so far... it *doesn't* get *nearly* as loud as it should. While doing a 140 is was cryin... i'd say 137 is the level where it sounded pretty good, and thats just not loud enough.... not in an SPL box in a 2 door blazer. SQ tests were objective, like it or not. You said it yourself the RL-P didnt like the bigger box... so stand by what you say, dont make excuses for why it doesn't sound as good! My test so far as agreed with you, yet you still call BS.... I didn't suggest it, I'm the one performing the test. Power doesnt matter to the SQ test, makes 0 difference. I didnt' just crank it and say ew... I played at various levels with lots of different material. I couldn't get the amp to the point of clipping with the RL-P... it cried before I could come close, so thats out the door. If the R wins, it deserves to win. The test is flat out subjective. Which btw... if you look at the results, the type S is the overall leader so far, didn't expect that did you? To me, it will be whatever I test to be the best. Brand, rating... NOTHING matters to me except RESULTS!!! [/QUOTE]

Verification