Phoenix Gold Phorum

I'm trying to decide which to go with. I will be using a Ti 1000.2 to power. For sound quality would I be better off going with 1 Ti elite sub or 2 RSD 12 subs with this particular amp? I have been told that it is a little low on power to optimally push the elite sub. However, sound quality is my biggest concern.


Thoughts, Ideas?

2 RSd....IMO


The single ti elite would present the ti1000.1 a not so friendly ohm load at around 1.5 ohms, which the ti1000.1 could handle, but expect it to get hot and you will have to upgrade the entire eltrical system. Run two RSd12ds @4ohms

Thats the way I was leaning, but wanted some more experienced opinions.

Anyone else?

fordtough1 wrote:\more experienced opinions.

o burn lol.....


Well if you are worried about SQ RSd it will not let you down....and to be honest the RSd in a car will prob present a flatter FR then the ti elite as the ti elite has more of a low end prescenes almost to much IMO. I also w/ the ti elite 12d I heard and my RSd, I found the traisient response to be better by the RSd12d. Which also IMO key to a sq subwoofer.

I didn't mean you dammit, I meant me.

and thanks for the advice

What are your plans for front stage?

Between the two choices, I would go with the RSD's at 4 ohms... loading a Ti1000.2 up at 2 ohms is a disaster for the electrical system.

I will probably use some RSD 6.5 components in front doors, and maybe in the rear deck also. Not really sure right now. I have tthe 1000.2 amp for the sub or subs, and Twisted's zx 475ti amp for the front and rear speakers. Now I'm just trying to decide what speakers to use while I'm saving the money to buy them.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

rsd comps w/ RSd subs = best bang for buck in audio


I ran that for about a week to test the rsd comps, and was very happy w/o any tunning.


ALSO NO REARS.....bridge the zx to a rsd comp set

This will be in a 2001 Ford Taurus. I figured I would need some rear fill. Am I wrong about this? I don't want it to be too bassy most of the time, Just nice rounded out sound.

i would duel bridge to the rsd comps in the front, then run deck power the rear rsd coax's for a fade-able rear fill.

you could fad all the way forward for SQ, then allow some rear for when you have passengers

I cant even get into a car w/ rear speakers any more and listen to the music....it drives me nuts. I always take control of the stereo and fade the rear off, and the driver always looks at me w/ a weird face.

Ok, that makes sense. I just need to save up enough money to buy a couple of subs and some components, and wiring, and everything else I need.

thanks guys

i sent you a PM

I was pleasantly surprised by the rear fill my Dayton Audio Reference Series drivers provided in the stock locations (they are ported boxes, basically).

At peak volumes I turn them nearly all the way down but at lower volumes they provide a fullness that I enjoy.

Now, I'm not saying you should get rear fill or whatever but in my particular setup, I think rear fill has it's place at lower volumes.

I'm sure there will be some trial and error before I get it all done. Hell, I may have different amps by then too. Who knows, but I want to get a system in, and then go from there.

bdubs767 wrote:I cant even get into a car w/ rear speakers any more and listen to the music....it drives me nuts. I always take control of the stereo and fade the rear off, and the driver always looks at me w/ a weird face.

thats kind of true if you are using the wrong rear fill. if you get some 6x9's like the JL VR's or Tangband that have pretty much no treble at all, you will have no problem blending in the rears with the front stage with the use of time alignment. even with a sub, you can still notice the difference of properly tuned rear fill. of course the type of vehicle may also be a factor.

D00B wrote:

bdubs767 wrote:I cant even get into a car w/ rear speakers any more and listen to the music....it drives me nuts. I always take control of the stereo and fade the rear off, and the driver always looks at me w/ a weird face.

thats kind of true if you are using the wrong rear fill. if you get some 6x9's like the JL VR's or Tangband that have pretty much no treble at all, you will have no problem blending in the rears with the front stage with the use of time alignment. even with a sub, you can still notice the difference of properly tuned rear fill. of course the type of vehicle may also be a factor.

IMO WRONG, as even w/ TA and tuned properly the music is coming from BEHIND plain and simple, which will destroy any sense of a front sound stage. Also speakers playing over laping FR range leads to phase issues and cancelation you have to deal w/.

also driver doesn't mean a thing, if you don't want any treble just cross it over low

Not sure what you meant by the sub comment, but with a sub in the rear it is truly different, as FR below 60hz is almost impossible to localize. Does that mean a LP on 60hz w/ a 24db octave slope will do it, prob not as some notes above 60hz will still be audible. I like to go around 24db slope around 45-50hz, usually cant tell down that low the sub is in the rear.

bdubs767 wrote:

D00B wrote:

bdubs767 wrote:I cant even get into a car w/ rear speakers any more and listen to the music....it drives me nuts. I always take control of the stereo and fade the rear off, and the driver always looks at me w/ a weird face.

thats kind of true if you are using the wrong rear fill. if you get some 6x9's like the JL VR's or Tangband that have pretty much no treble at all, you will have no problem blending in the rears with the front stage with the use of time alignment. even with a sub, you can still notice the difference of properly tuned rear fill. of course the type of vehicle may also be a factor.

IMO WRONG, as even w/ TA and tuned properly the music is coming from BEHIND plain and simple, which will destroy any sense of a front sound stage. Also speakers playing over laping FR range leads to phase issues and cancelation you have to deal w/.

also driver doesn't mean a thing, if you don't want any treble just cross it over low

Not sure what you meant by the sub comment, but with a sub in the rear it is truly different, as FR below 60hz is almost impossible to localize. Does that mean a LP on 60hz w/ a 24db octave slope will do it, prob not as some notes above 60hz will still be audible. I like to go around 24db slope around 45-50hz, usually cant tell down that low the sub is in the rear.

Not saying youre a noob or anything but Im gonna have to disagree. I have a Dodge Neon with rear fill and with the right t/a it sounds like wearing head phones. I wish I could just sit you inside my car. Its not by any means the best system, but the sound imaging is spot on.

Ok, my next question. With 2 subs do I want to have them share airspace in the box or seperate the 2 sides of the box, and how much air space do I need for the RSD 12? I read about the 1.8 cu so if they share airspace does that mean 3.6 cu? Also, what is the mounting depth of these subs?

i thougt seperate boxes because when one sub is broken the other get´s twice airspace and what changes the box specs

size of a box for an rsd do not know ,only what pg say´s

only heard one in a closed box and found it playing very good

Shared is fine. Separate is handy for bracing, but not necessary if you build a rigid enough box. 3.6cuft is the size, but you could do as small as 2.4 with the power you are throwing at it.

phoenixgold_icy wrote:i thougt seperate boxes because when one sub is broken the other get´s twice airspace and what changes the box specs

size of a box for an rsd do not know ,only what pg say´s

only heard one in a closed box and found it playing very good

3.6 is correct. you could drop to as low as 2.4 and it will still sound great...but bigger will be smoother, lower bass.

i would imagine once you get to that big of a box the ~6" of mounting depth wont be much of a worry!


as far as chambers, it depends how you are powering them. if you are powering each with a single amp, one large common chamber will be fine.

As far as rear fill is concerned, I have to totally agree with bdubs on this one.

I have been preaching the removal of rear fill in car audio for years now.

Every time I go to a concert, no matter how hard I try to turn my head, I am compelled to look at the stage. So, the sound is in front of me, and that is what I am used to. And recording studios are the same. They place the microphones such that the band is in front of the indented audience, not behind it.

All rear fill is good for is greater output (due to additional cone area, and more amp power), which to some is the illusion of good sound. I for one am not interested in being “surrounded” by loud distortion (which you get when the rear starts cancelling the front with certain frequencies). I prefer good clean sound up front.

This is not to say that a system with rear fill cannot sound good. I have heard several which sounded great, but the rear fill was nearly faded to off, or was otherwise significantly overpowered by the front.

In my system, it sounded much like headphones to me, and I only had a pair of components up front. Nearly everyone who heard my system asked me what components I was running in the back, and I had to actually show them there were no components to prove they did not exist.

You were born with only two ears, it makes sense to reason you only need two speakers, assuming they play full range and are properly positioned.

Eric D wrote:You were born with only two ears, it makes sense to reason you only need two speakers, assuming they play full range and are properly positioned.

to bad no driver like that lives yet

Thanks for all the help guys. I'm sure I will have more questions before I get my system in, but it is nice to get some ideas to get me in the right direction.