Elite Sneak Peek

[poljana]

Thanks for the great explanation Eric! I´m a real fan of your numbers and their background attitude!

WELL SAID!! I agree 100%!!



...damn that thing is pure sex

[brenzbmr@sb]

well after looking at this thread i must say the product looks very promicing and i actually impressed with the overall LOOK and FLOW of the amps. the "old" tri led look really brings back the heritage of titanium and can still be mixed matched with older product. I cant wait for CES pics so i can get a really good look at the product.

good job PG!

aloha

[kg1961]

any more pics of the speaker and 4channel amps? or any other gear being made with this product line

[audiogood]

I would like to see the x-over,s insides and get an look at the mid woofer

[AVICJR]

Since the PG website has the Ti Elite comps presented now, can we get some more pics and or information on the set please Morgan?

[evo9]

Press release http://phoenixgold.com/images/pdfs/pres ... %20CES.pdf

Initially, Phoenix Gold is rolling out three Elite-Series amplifiers – the Elite.1, Elite.2 and
Elite.4. These are some of the most powerful amplifiers Phoenix Gold has ever built, and
each amplifier comes with a birth certificate guaranteeing the amplifier is underrated by 5
to 20%.

Fingers crossed that a 5 channel is in the works.








.




.

[audiogood]

I would like to see another 7 ch amp. Like the ti900.7

[evo9]

I would like to see another 7 ch amp. Like the ti900.7

So you would rather have have;

Titanium 900.7
CENTER, FRONT and REAR CHANNELS
Into 4 ohms @ 12.5 Vdc (IASCA/USAC) . . . . . . . . . .18 x 5
Into 4 ohms @ 14.4 Vdc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 x 5
Into 2 ohms @ 14.4 Vdc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .100 x 5
Into 4 ohms Bridged @ 14.4 Vdc (Front/Rear Only)..200 x 2
SUB CHANNELS
Into 4 ohms @ 12.5 Vdc (IASCA/USAC) . . . . . . . . . .25 x 2
Into 4 ohms @ 14.4 Vdc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 x 2
Into 2 ohms @ 14.4 Vdc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .125 x 2
Into 4 ohms Bridged @ 14.4 Vdc . . . . . . . . . . . . . .250 x 1
Into 2 ohms Bridged @ 14.4 Vdc . . . . . . . . . . . . . .400 x 1
Common Specifications
Frequency Response . . . . . . . . . . . .±1dB, 20Hz to 20kHz
Signal to Noise Ratio (A-weighted) . . . . . . . . . . . . .>110dB
Input Sensitivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .200 millivolts to 6 volts
DC Input Voltage Range . . . . . . . . . . .10 volts to 15.5 volts
Recommended Fuse Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80 Amps
Typical Current Draw at Idle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 amps
Minimum Load . . . . . . . . . .1 ohm stereo / 2 ohms bridged
Dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25.5L x 10.0W x 2.35H
Front and Center High Pass Range . . . . . . . .40Hz to 4kHz
Rear High and Band Pass Range . . . . . . . . .40Hz to 4kHz
Sub Low Pass Range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40Hz to 400Hz
Crossover Slopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24dB per Octave
Twin-T Bass Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0dB to +18dB


Some of us runs Dynaudio & Morel speakers that requires power! I personally would prefer this or better in the Elite line;

AMPLIFIER STAGE
Distortion - THD (1k Hz @ 4Ω ) A, B Ch: 0.05 %
Distortion - THD (100 Hz @ 4Ω), C (sub) Ch: 0.3 %
Bandwidth (-3 dB) A, B Ch: 4 ÷ 60k Hz
Bandwidth (-3 dB) C (sub) Ch: 7 ÷ 350 Hz
S/N ratio (A weighted @ 1V) A, B Ch: 100 dB
S/N ratio (A weighted @ 1V) C (sub) Ch: 87 dB
Damping factor (1k Hz @ 4Ω) A, B Ch: 100
Damping factor (100 Hz @ 4Ω) C (sub) Ch: 80
Input sensitivity: 0.3 ÷ 5 V RMS
Input impedance: 15k Ω
Speaker-In sensitivity: 1.4 ÷ 24 V RMS
Speaker-In impedance: 5k Ω
Minimum load impedance A / B / C Ch: 4Ω / 2Ω / 2Ω
NOMINAL POWER (RMS) A + B + C Ch @ 12 VDC,
THD 0,3%, 4Ω: 50 W x 2 + 120 W x 2 + 500 W x 1
OUTPUT POWER (RMS) A + B + C Ch @ 14.4 VDC, THD 1%:
• 5 Ch: 75 W x 2 (4Ω) + 140 W x 2 (4Ω) + 600 W x 1 (4Ω)
• 5 Ch: 75 W x 2 (4Ω) + 140 W x 2 (4Ω) + 1000 W x 1 (2Ω)
• 5 Ch: 75 W x 2 (4Ω) + 250 W x 2 (2Ω) + 1000 W x 1 (2Ω)

If you want an amp that has phenomenal sound quality is underrated and delivers TONS of dynamic headroom (ala MS, ZPA, etc) you have come to the right place.

Yes please! A 5 channel to compete with the likes of the Audison Voce series . I will buy it for sure along with the 4 channel to run my setup.
Sure there can be a 7 channel. Just not in the Elite line .










.

[smgreen20]

If they came out with a 5 ch amp in the Elite line, as long as the power was good, I'd heavily consider selling my Audison LRx5.1k for one. Only thing, the "front" 4 chs would have to have a crossover flexible enough for an active setup. Just like the ZX450, just easier to setup like my Audison.

[Eric D]

I for one HOPE they DON'T build a 5-channel model.

There is nothing "Elite" about a 5-channel amp, only "convenient".

I am not saying 5-channels are junk (heck, I ran one for 2 years in my vehicle), I just don't associate 5-channels with "high end". Putting one big power supply, or even multiple ones, plus a Class D output section (for sub) all under one hood, totally defeats the point of using top notch Sanken devices, and Burr Brown operational amplifiers.

If you want a 5-channel, the monster Ti1600.5 is more than enough. As it is I really doubt it is a major seller. We are fortunate enough PG built such an amp which can only be marketed to so few.

My hope is the new Ti Elite is something which can finally meet or exceed what MS did back in the day. So far the design looks promising. MT-200 devices are a huge cut about those used in the MS, as are Burr Brown parts. Plus these amps have board mounted terminals and RCAs, which the lack of is a major drawback to the MS amps of old. Any amp with loose wires is poorly designed (unless you simply have no choice). With the old MS amps, I loved the big gold buss bars, but hate the loose speaker wires, and TOTALLY despise the RCA wires as well. They break off easily, and look tacky.

Really if you want to get purist about it, making a 4-channel is going out on a limb. Most so called "audiophiles" don't want a 4-channel either, they prefer a pair of two channel amps. I personally think 4-channels are just fine, but I am far from a purist.

[audiogood]

Um no I was thinking of more power then the ti900.7. I like to have an amp that has 6ch this way I have 2ch,s for tweets , 2ch for mids and 2ch,s for woofers,s or have the opt to run an 5.1 setup . And I was thinking of spec,s of 100 watts rms @.005% thd 20-20,000 . I also run a ti1200.1 on my subs .. but I gess its only good if you pay more for it right. If u have morel and Dayton then u must be rocking sinfoni and Macintosh amps...

[ttocs]

I would have to agree with eric.

[smgreen20]

I will disagree. I would have to say that my Audison LRx5.1k is the perfect all in one SQ machine. So a 5ch SQ amp can be made, the 5.1k is proof.

I just want the PG name back in my ride/s. And for me, space is a factor, but SQ in the goal.

[audiogood]

An 6 ch amp would be an better bet it think as you can have 75-100 rms x 4 ch and 150-200 rms x 2ch then if u want to run an three way active system like me this amp can fill the bill . And if you want to run an sub and 4 speakers this amp can do that as well. Not every one can aford to buy 3 $1200 amps = $3600 and then dropping another $2000 on an sub amp then go buy the speakers and sub,s to hook to them . All I am saying is an 6 ch amp can fill in an nich where top quality is an must but on an budget say in the $1200-$1500 range ..

[Eric D]

I will disagree. I would have to say that my Audison LRx5.1k is the perfect all in one SQ machine. So a 5ch SQ amp can be made, the 5.1k is proof.

I just want the PG name back in my ride/s. And for me, space is a factor, but SQ in the goal.

If space is a factor, but SQ is the goal, you have to compromise. You can't have SQ and SPL, you can't have tiny and powerful.

Sure there are loud SQ systems, and tiny amps which get loud, but these are compromises. If you want SQ you have to go with multiple chassis. At a minimum one amp for highs, and one for lows. This allows the full range high frequency amp to maintain a stable output, without the burden of a sub section depleting it of power.

Any 5-channel amp is more of a novelty item than a performance oriented product. Even the Audison LRc5.1k follows this. A pair of Audison amps would out perform it. Better SQ, and more power, with more stability.

If anyone want a real multichannel amp with no compromises, they have to look back to previous PG amps, such as the Frank, Son of Frank, Outlaw, Route 66, Reactor, etc. These amps give you two dedicated boards in one chassis, with no compromises. But, none of them are all that small.

Now, there is no reason why PG (or anyone else) could not build an amp with only one board, but two dedicated power supplies, with isolated output sections and everything else needed to perform. The only problem is it would no longer be small.

[evo9]

I will disagree. I would have to say that my Audison LRx5.1k is the perfect all in one SQ machine. So a 5ch SQ amp can be made, the 5.1k is proof.

I just want the PG name back in my ride/s. And for me, space is a factor, but SQ in the goal.

If space is a factor, but SQ is the goal, you have to compromise. You can't have SQ and SPL, you can't have tiny and powerful.

.

With that said your point is pointless! A compromise is always going to be in the way. With todays modern vehicles owners are looking for stealth & simple along with SQ. If you have not heard the JL Audio HD900, you should give it a try. It is tiny, powerful & according to many SQ & SPL plenty. I know of a few car stereo shop here in south Florida. They have been in business for over 28 years. Their biggest seller are the multi-channel amps. Not just for your average Accord & Camry but, Aston Martins, Rolls Royce, BMW Mercedez & the list goes on. These vehicle owners tells the shop what they want & the shop delivers accordingly. These shops dont impose their belief on these buyers but, simply guide them towards a happy purchase. I also know of a few shop owner with the hardline belief like you. None of them are in business today! They were always pushing what they believe onto the customers. Which ultimately drove the customers away & put themselves out of business.

So yeah........................ If there is a viable market out there for a 5 or 6 channel amp. It would be in the manufacturer best interest to offer it to the market. If it was bad product Alpine, Audison, JL Audio & others would not be offering it. The fact is these companies make pruduct to sell. Not sit in a stock room hoping they sell because they fail to meet the market needs.





.

[ttocs]

I use to work at a high-end car audio place up in scottsdale az, they had dealer agreements with range rover, ferrari, and porche that were just around the corner. My first day there for example the pulled out two bmw m8's that they put a full k40 sytem(For $4k each) in and then pulled in a 911 twin turbo cerrara 4 with a full interior leather package that was just nuts(leather on the airvent slats, hell even the speaker grills were leather). They did full-on custom system making their own rca's and often welding amp-racks just so that they could have a flat/solid place to mount them. Honestly the customers often times could not care less what was put in it, hardly even the price as long as we stayed with in their limits. They would just walk in, throw the keys at the owner/salesmen and say,"keep it under 4 this time if you can, 5 if you have too." When they picked them up the were neither impressed with the gear(All top notch) nor the install they were just going on to the next appt. We did alot of multi-channel amps in those cars only because it was easier on us to install, saved us time and money. I think that is still the case from what I have heard from the other installers still there. Multi-channels are convinient but I have to agree that if you are going high-end sq then you should consider going seperate.

[Eric D]

I think a major point here has been missed. This discussion is about the Elite amp, and other high end models.

As great as the JL amp may be, it is not a real SQ amp (by audiophile standards). This is not my opinion, this is the collective opinion of countless audiophiles out there, many of which probably have their head up their butt.

The reason being, JLs tiny amps are not Class A/B, they are full range Class D, and no one would ever lump them in with the legendary Class A/B amps over the years.

If you want 5 channels and you want top of the line, the best way to do it is with a 4-channel and a 2-channel (bridged). These take up more space than those who wish to compromise would allow.

[evo9]

Eric, I understand this about the Elite series. But keep in mind what I said about newer vehicles & people not willing to give up space. They may be willing to pay the price for an Elite but want a one amp solution. There is also those of us who runs a full 3 way front active + rear fill & subwoofer. I would bet the majority would opt for 9-10 channels on two amps instead of three.

I hear yah on the JL HD's. I use to have them in my car..................................... They have been replaced by Tru Technology B4100 & SB6 .






.

[audiogood]

My amps r big .. and I run two of them. I do not want fill my whole trunk with amps and bat,s caps and wires to support 4 amps I like havving room for other stuff . I also like sq I am not looking to do competitions just please my ears and still have room for groceries. Now if an 6ch amp was made with the best parts possible then I would buy it . As it is now my sound system in my car is worth more then the car itself.

[Eric D]

There are a few 6-channel amps for your guys...

Frank Amp N' Stein
Reactor
Route 66

All of which use some of the best parts you can get.

If someone wants to pay for a 1-amp solution, and they want it in the form of a new PG Elite amp, it will probably still be larger than what space they are willing to give up. These new Elites are not tiny. For these people, the SD series is probably a great option. It should still sound "similar" to a Ti Elite amp, but with less than half the space taken up.

I am 100% confident a Ti Elite 5 or 6 channel would not sell any better than the Ti1600.5 does now. Maybe Morgan can chime in with some numbers. Additionally, it is not like going with the Ti instead of the Ti Elite is a huge step down.

Any effort spent developing a Ti Elite 5 or 6 channel would be better spent in making the next generation Ti Elite even better (IMO)...

As for needing 9-10 channels, my guess is any sonic gain you get from running so many speakers would be negated by all those channels being in one chassis, with all their signals bleeding into each other. Back in the day I had seen (only in car audio magazines mind you) systems with 8 or more single channel (mono) amps. Sure this is a mess of wiring, and takes up lots of space. But it is just as much an audiophile solution as running an active 3 way front with rear fill, and subs.

I guess the other point I need to point out is I have been on this forum for several years, and I have read countless times "If PG builds XXX product, I will buy one". Well, PG has answered the call with a lot of the products they currently have, and will likely answer the call with these new Ti Elite amps as well. Still, I just don't see members buying these products like they said they would. Yes some have bought new equipment, but it seems like all those waiting for something specific never bust out their wallets when the products finally show up.

No matter how into car audio you may be, it is often not easy to drop $1,000 on an amp. Especially with so many fine products floating around on the used market.

[MW3]

Good discussion here.

Frankly, its undetermined if we will do a Elite.5 for many of the reasons Eric has outlined.

Elite amps were designed with little to no compromised involved. However, a five channel is a different challenge.

Once you start to factor the huge sanken output devices, op-amps, cooling, power, size things start to get very big, very expensive and ultimately not much of a better option than two separate amplifiers. You have to start looking at compromises in performance which is not what Elite is about. Call us snobs, the Elite amps are not small or cheap, but they sound damn good.

But then again, never say never...

[brenzbmr@sb]

^^^^^ exactly^^^^^

I couldnt have said it better myself!

Me personally I agree with eric on this, I believe phoenix gold has answered our wishes. they have everything from inexpensive to the top of the line. I do how ever think a five channel could work in the elite lineup but again a true "audiophile" and i have met many in my time would not even concider it becuase of what they "believe". to many nuances to those kinda people and are hard to make happy from an installers point of view. You all take care and ill be back soon. gotta go work! want to build me a complete pg elite system for my 2nd gen IS!

[dwnrodeo]

If someone wants to pay for a 1-amp solution, and they want it in the form of a new PG Elite amp, it will probably still be larger than what space they are willing to give up. These new Elites are not tiny. For these people, the SD series is probably a great option. It should still sound "similar" to a Ti Elite amp, but with less than half the space taken up.

As for needing 9-10 channels, my guess is any sonic gain you get from running so many speakers would be negated by all those channels being in one chassis, with all their signals bleeding into each other. Back in the day I had seen (only in car audio magazines mind you) systems with 8 or more single channel (mono) amps. Sure this is a mess of wiring, and takes up lots of space. But it is just as much an audiophile solution as running an active 3 way front with rear fill, and subs.

I agree here. Building a 5-channel amp with the power output of the Elite.4 and Elite.1 in a single chassis is going to be HUGE, even if you start lowering the power output of the sub channel to make the amp a more manageable size. Look at the Roadster 66, 75 watts x 4 + 650 x 1 and that is 32" long! It barely fits between the shock towers in the trunk of my SRT-4 as it is. Don't get me wrong, I love my 5-channel one amp solution, but physical size plays a factor in an install which is why I recently purchased a SD1300.5 rather than a Ti1600.5. In my Explorer, I have 9 channels of amplification available to me (SD1300.5 and X200.4) and those amps are tucked neatly behind the trim panels on opposite sides of the vehicle taking up ZERO cargo space. There's no way I could fit one large amp behind the panels, I had a difficult time with the 200.4! With that many channels, I'd rather split it up between two amps that could be stacked or seperated to different locations. If you insist on a 5-channel amplifier, the SD1300.5 is a great little amp and the Ti1600.5 offers nearly the same power output but with class A/B channels for front/rear.

[audiogood]

Well all I was trying to say is I would like to see an 6 ch class A/B amp made with the best parts . like my 900.7 . Me myself I do not like 5 ch amps I think they r dumb if you want an 5 ch amp bridge two channels of an 6 ch and there u go .I do not like 5 ch as I hate any class d amp . Sure I could take the stand point of purest .. but then I would be asking for class A/B mono amps . One amp one speaker with no blead over . While we are at it let's take out the x-over from this mono block as it uses power that should go to the speaker. Now we r talking an true purest amp . After all an two ch is an compromise buy your def and a 4 ch is an sin witch would my 6ch amp the anti Christ .