How to Drive my Ti 9s?

[ttocs]

so then just out of curiosity, what if I could arrange to trade for a partially working 2125 that needs caps and a little TLC for my working MQ430 to get a few extra watts for the 9's? I am sure it would take a couple of bucks to get back into fighting shape but nothing beyond my means or too expensive and it would seem that if I could throw a couple of extra watts at them that it woud not hurt...

[ttocs]

sorry if you guys tired of me asking questions while getting little done on the project. I wish I felt well enough to pound it out as I know when I was healthy that in a shop I could do it all in a couple of weeks max but I do not have the energy to do this on the few days I do not feel bad.

Again, if I could trade the 430 for a 2125 that needed a little work but was repairable for not too much would you do it? Like I said it seems the few extra watts for the 9s would be helpfull and if I do not need to put too much into the 2125 then wouldn't you?

[Stryker]

Do you have a deal lined up for a trade or just hoping out loud?
I would if it was me... I like the look of the older amps but they suck a lot of current. I would love to see 4-10's, 2-2125's to feed them and 4-430's all bridged but that might get expensive. Still haven't figured out if you are a 3or more amp guy or a 2 or less sorta chap. Take one guess what i am
I'm kinda confused....are you still gonna use the roadster irregardless of the other ideas??
Maybe some teaser pics of your car to keep us interested here. JK.

[ttocs]

I have a tentative offer lined up with a new member here after reading this post. He is considering it as I don't think it is a horrible trade and he can use the 430 for his install as well. I am still using the roadster and really decided to add a 2nd amp after comming across a deal on some matching Ti5s componants that I can use for rear fill. As for current demands I am not too worried about it as I have a 200A alt that keeps a solid 14.5 under load, not to mention I just added HIDs which will cut down on the current consumption as well, would really love a 2500 to be honest.... I am really a KISS (keep it simple stupid) fan and like to keep things as simple as possible which is one reason the install is taking a little longer then normal. My trucks install is solid but to do anything to the amp requires pulling almost everything out of the rear end. My last install in the stang I made much more servicable and found that it was great to be able to pull the entire system in 20 mins or less when I needed to drop it off for some body damage for example. The challenge there is making it all solid enough that you can push the car with it when its mounted, easily removable both with the brackets to hold it as well as the wiring and still hid all this easy-to-do stuff or secure it so that a theif doesn't take advantage of this option as well. My amp rack that I almost have finished I made 4 clips that are held in place by a screw/wing-nuts that flip out of the way to pull it out. I will throw in a few security bolts of some type so that I can pull the rack with two bolts, one tool and hopefully no time. I will get a few pics of the rack so far a little later to show it all but it has not been welded yet. This is also the first time I have worked with metal(aluminum) so it is taking longer then it would have with wood.

[Bfowler]

THIS would solve your power problem

http://phoenixphorum.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=18831

[ttocs]

are you saying I should pull the one out of my truck? I would have to replace the caps first.

That RSD 1200.1 in the classifieds for $200 is lookin better and better. That would kill the 10s and the roadsters sub out is perfect for the 9's other then the fact its mono. Not sure how big of a deal that would be on midbass though, I just can't picture how it would sound.

[capitolj80]

Lol, yeah you should go after that 1200.1 in the classifieds!!

[ttocs]

I sent the guy a pm and I am just waitng for a responce

[capitolj80]

you sent the guy with the RSD1200 a response? lol cuz I'm that guy and I haven't gotten anything...hmm.. Actually, I think someone else also tried to PM me and nothin showed up in my inbox.

[ttocs]

my power problem has been solved......

Anyone wanting an mq430 with fresh caps hit me up with a pm.

[00goobs]

I have an RSD 1200.1 and a Roadster as well. I just need a car to install them in, hehehe... I was planning to use them in a 50 chevy truck if I ever have time/money to work on it. Interested in a mini roadster to house the 1200.1? It was a passing thought.

[ttocs]

mini roadster?

I don't think the 10s I have will know what hit them, but it will be the perfect power out for the 9's with the only downside being that they will play a mono signal but I don't think it will be too big of a deal...

[ttocs]

ok, beein sittin in the hospital dreaming of the day I will be able to install and then jam the hell out of my new stereo. I have discussed earlier that I was going to use the eq215ix to split the low signal out for the 9's. since I pulled the trigger on the rsd1200.1 and both it and the sub side of the raodster have a fullrange aux out, should I use them? I could run one sub rca, down to my base cube(out of the adjustable sub out on the 9887), then to the 1200.1 and from the aux out to the sub side of the roadster. I can use the x-overs in the amp to adjust the signal to fit my needs, as well as use the lpl out on both to balance them. This way I could use the basecube to adjust either one depending on what I need and how its tuned, as well as balance the signal both from the variable sub out and the lpls. Dumb idea from thinking too much?

[ttocs]

damn still dreaming. The only problem I see with that option is that the 9's would only be able to be tuned/eq'd by the basscube and bass controls. Now if I nixed the sub out on the deck and then ran just on rca out to the eq, then from the low-pass out on the eq to the bass-cube as and then daisy chain the amps? This would give me full eq control of ALL the speakers as well as the basecube(if needed) and the lpl can control the levels/balance on the 9 and 10s.

[dedlyjedly]

You could drive yourself crazy thinking of all the different processing possibilities at your disposal when you're using a pile of PG gear like you've got! I know I did when I was in your shoes a few years back and I just found myself suffering from a case of deja vu while I was trying to analyze your options!

That said, I hope it might be a little more beneficial if I just shared a few thoughts for you to consider and let you work out the ultimate system design.

First off, I'm glad to see you're putting the Ti9's up front. As crazy as it may sound, I saw several Ti Elite systems over the years where it seemed like the installer simply gave up and put them in the rear shelf or quarter panels. IMO, the primary strategy of implementing dedicated mid bass drivers is to utilize psycho-acoustics to effectively "pull" the sub stage forward in the vehicle. That's accomplished by lowering the filter for the sub bass and filling the gap in frequency response with the drivers up front (since it is easier for the human ear to perceive the point source of those frequencies). Using that same train of thought, I always considered it optimal to run the mid bass drivers in stereo. I know it can be argued that the vast majority of audio content is already mixed in mono across most of that range, but I would contest that if you're building a system to this level of performance then marginal gains are really all we can hope to accomplish!

It's been said here, and I would agree, that a 45hz subsonic filter is likely to be on the low side for the mid bass signal. Keep in mind that you don't need to play that low in order to accomplish our primary objective and that in doing so you're likely to limit the output capability and thus the impact of your mid bass. Of course other variables like the possibility of enclosures and/or proper Infinite Baffle implementation for your 9's will certainly be at play when making that consideration. IIRC, I ended up in the range of about 70-225hz for my Ti9's using the 24dB/octave filters in my Ti500.4's (I didn't look it up but aren't the EQ filters 12dB/octave). In my situation, shifting the entire bandpass range up also helped to reduce the workload I was demanding out of the 5" mids. IMHO, even if you can get your 9's to play that low, you're still going to want some flexibility once you get to the tuning stage that a subsonic simply won't offer.

I found that I could run the Ti9's very well with considerably less power than the advertised 350 rms. I also had the best results running about the same amounts of power to my Ti5's, which definitely qualify as a power hungry component set. What I'm getting at is that while your MQ430/mid bass and RSD500.4/component setup would probably level match all right you're really not going to be throwing enough power into the TiXO to even realize the full potential of that set. I ended up bridging my pair of Ti500.4's down to 250x2 with the front section into the TiXO and the rear to the corresponding Ti9. This amount of power really brought the components to life and put me in the right ball park to level match the mid bass drivers.

In my experience dual lpl's sounded a lot cooler than they actually were. Using a sensitivity type adjustment is the bees knees as long as you're only adjusting one in a system! I know it seems like it would be a case of more is better, but keep in mind what the lpl44 really is. Once you add a second to control mid bass and sub bass independently you pretty much throw any linearity right out the window. I'm bad enough as it is, but with that increased level of adjustment that's all I found my self doing...constantly adjusting levels, instead of enjoying my music! I think a highly capable equalizer that effectively controls every driver in the system is much more effective at making your dedicated mid bass work properly and more importantly, consistantly! Keep the lpl for the subs!

I still want to add a Roadster66 to my collection, but I'd be lying if I told you I didn't think PG completely dropped the ball when they failed to put a pair of the 300.1's in the beast instead of the 600.1. I mean think of the possibilities a pair of class a/b monoblocks with flexible crossovers would afford when paired with that four channel!!! For crying out loud, they built it as an homage to the Route66 and it's not even a damn six-channell!

[dwnrodeo]

I'm going to agree with dedlyjedly here when it comes to using two LPL's. I have two LPL's installed in my Exploder and currently only the midbass LPL is connected right now. I haven't even bothered to connect the sub LPL because honestly, I don't think I need to attenuate my sub. It sounds pretty damn good on it's own. The only reason I am using the LPL for my midbass is because I am not using a linedriver to feed my midbass amp and the 10" midbass drivers are having a hard time keeping up with my mids and tweets! When I get some time, I'm going to run my entire front stage off of my EQ215x so that I can adjust all of the gains at the EQ and leave all of the gains on my amps at the minimum setting. If you're using your EQ215ix, then you shouldn't have any issues level matching your midbass with your mids and tweets.

I too was wondering about your setup and powering your Ti 9's using the mono sub output of the Roadster. Even though the 9's are playing lower frequencies, they should still be in stereo. I think you may be overthinking your setup. I would run the Ti 5 comp set bridged off of the Roadster's front section which receive signal from the highpass output of the EQ215ix, run the Ti 9's off of another amp (MQ430 bridged) which receive signal from the lowpass outputs of the 215ix, and run your RSDc's off of the Roadster's sub section. Use the basscube for your subs, and adjust everything else with your 9887 and EQ. After all of the headaches of my last install, I've learned that simpler can be better.

[ttocs]

the 9's will be in a sealed enclosure. My door panels stick out a few inches from the door so I will be able to make a thin but long box that will take up the entire bottom section of the door. Not sure what airspace will be when its finished, gonna make it as big as I can and if I need to make it smaller then I will add some bracing or something to take up space. I know it says they do not take much (.1 or something)so there will probably be some tuning on the enclosures needed.

I could see where dual lpl's could be too much for most users but I am COMPLETE tweeker and often find myself making small adjustments here/there depending on who/what I am listening too. This is why putting the eq with in arms reach was soo important as an eq in the trunk only gets touched once. I really do not touch the eq that much but small tweeks on the lpl/bass-cube are common for me and occasionally if something is really bothering me I might make a small adj to the ind freq on the eq, but really not all that often. The added complexity of the dual lpls really would not scare me off.

I will probably play around with the setup a little be to see what sounds best then with the added opinions, although either way I will probably will go ahead and daisy chain the 9s amp off of the subs either way. the mono signal on the 9s has been buggin me in theory so I will have to see how it translate to real world listening. If I do not like the extra power from the 1200.1 I I will be able to at least get my money back on it.

Sitting in the hospital deaming of my stereo being finished and how to do it seems to pass the day a little faster. Hopefully I can go home today and stay there for more then a month this time and get back on my feet and start with it. The disadvantage of trying out the different options is that the 2nd half of the amp rack that will hold the #2 amp will need to wait to see which one I like best as aluminum frame I was planning on doing will not work well between the two but no big deal. Once I figure out which I like i will finish it up as I have the two main pieces already bent, just need to see how far apart they will be determined on the size of the amp. Good news is that with that out of the way I can either move on to the sub enclosure or the 9s or making the 4" hole in the kicks bigger to fit the 5. These tasks are not all that daunting to me as I already have a start on most of them from the previous install and the previous parts need modifying with the exception of the 9s. modifing the door panels has been in my mind for a while and I have a plan of attack that shouldn't be too bad.

[Eric D]

I guess I might as well throw my opinion in on this one as well.

So far it looks like you have established you will need to buy or trade at least one item. With that in mind, you only need one item, a ZX500v2.

Run your rear RCAs to the rear inputs of the Roadster, and use those channels to power the rear speakers. Don't install the crossovers or tweeters on the rear speakers. Just high pass the mids with the roadster and let them naturally roll off. If you don't like it later, add a coil inline to give them a first order lowpass at a frequency of your choosing.

Run your front RCAs to the EQ215ix. Run the lowpass out of the EQ to your Roadster's sub section, and run the highpass out to your new ZX500v2. On the ZX500v2, set its crossover for lowpass, and use it to power your mids. Run the AUX out of the ZX500v2 on to the front of the Roadster, and use those front channels to power the front components. The AUX output of the ZX500v2 will be high pass for the front components.

This would get you the ability to EQ the subs, midbass, and components all with the one EQ, but not the rear. You will have a LPL to run the subs from the EQ. A second LPL to run the midbass if you so choose. You can still fade front to rear, but the more rear you go, the less sub you get.

The ZX500v2 is good for at least 200W a channel, which will easily keep up with what the Roadster can do on your front components.

[kg1961]

would love that set up Eric good ideas there missed part of that day dreaming!!!

[dedlyjedly]

^^^Good plan!!

ZX/ZXTi/Ti preamp section ftw

[ttocs]

thanks for the help/opinions I really appreciate them and take them under consideration. I considered a ZX/Ti series but then with a little more thought I really wanted to try and stay with something the RSD area just so that the outputs could be a little more evenly matched. I have had sytems before using different amps where it seemed it was always hard to tune them as one would get a little louder then the other, quicker, which always left them unbalanced. If I tuned it at full volume then it seemed out of balance when at listening level and as well as the opposit...

I pulled the trigger on the 1200.1(tax money yea) so I want to try it out and see if the lack of stereo on the mid-bass will bother me, never tried it so dunno. I will also swap in the 430 just to see if it does supply the power I need and still stay balanced. If need more power and a stereo signal then I will need to look for a 500v2 or If I come across a good looking ZX/ti series between now and then for the right price I will try and throw one of those into the testing. I got the 1200 for a fair price that I can get my money back out of it, an bought the MQ damaged and repaired it so at this point I am not loosing anything but time and trouble of swapping them around for testing but I like that crap anyway to ensure the best output. Worst part really will be that I will not be able to finish the amp rack till I select amp #2, but no biggie. Sounds like a lot of trouble but I am building this system in a car I am never going to sell, I hope to get at least 10 yrs of great listening from it so a little time selecting componants IN the car will just net happier listening later.

I am not sure if I want the ability to fade my speakers which was why I had always planned on using the aux band-pass out on the eq to feed the rears. Those are speakers I can honestly set once and really not worry about again.

hoping to start on my sub enclosure shortly. I will be mounting the tens in the spare tire well and I got a 1" thick, by 5" x 14" piece of plexi and an extra RSDC sub cone that I am going to put together and carve/shape into some kind of funky grill/display that will be seen when the cover is removed. Its been in my head for a while and waiting to get out....

[Eric D]

If you ever do consider the ZX, don't worry about getting anything to match. I assure you if it is PG it will blend just fine.

So far I have verified the MS, M, ZX, Ti, and Xenon all use the exact same basic circuit design. The preamp sections are nearly identical, with the same design for their output sections. All that changes between them is power level, and the packaging the circuit board is in. The ZPA is also very similar, but has a few slight differences. I think the big bonus with the ZPA is lack of op-amps in its design.

I am confident the Rsd amps are the same as well. The "PG circuit" as I can call it is the hallmark of PG amp design, and the basis for these amps' great sound.

If you put an Rsd amp in an A/B comparison with any older PG amp, set for the same output level, I don't think anyone would ever be able to tell them apart.

[ttocs]

good to know, thanks. Like I said if I come across one for a price that I can throw it into th testing, and get my money out of it if I don't like it I will jump on it.