Phoenix Gold Phorum

This is a what would you run poll! And why.

I have an opportunity to either rock some RSd amps or Xenon. Either would be fine by me.

Pros / Cons:
- RSd is Made in China
- RSd available BNIB
- Xenon is more powerful in 100.4 format versus RSd 500.4
- Xenon is Made in Korea
- Xenon seems to be impossible to repair? And a higher failure rate compared to RSd.

FWIW power isn't everything. I put BNIB MB Quart DSC4125 against a RSd 500.4 and I enjoyed the RSd much more. The RSd required less gain for equal power and ran much cooler than the DSC4125.

Looks wise I think both are attractive, but the Xenon gets the nod in my book.

Any and all opinions welcome here.

Thanks,

xenon is made in south korea.

xenon wasnt rated the same as the rsd....i would bet they are similar power ratings actually if a apples to apples test was set up.

rsd's being cea2006 rated is actually a pretty big deal and makes power ratings look deceptively low (which i suspect is why it stacked up so favorable to the mbquart)

that said, i think the rsd is more solid all around, but the xenons have way better crossover, and the xeload is damn handy. and the xenons are fan cooled which can help in some install situations.


so i think it comes down to how/where you want to install them, and how much processing them you need to do

oh, and choice 3 isn't valid...they are very different designed amps, other then the output stage having similar features

Good info B! I updated the original post with your info.

I cannot edit the poll... Just think of choice 3 as a general "Tie" then.

a mod can!

Most things being equal, why would ya choose an amp that can't be repaired easily and has a supposed failure rate. The 2006 CEA ratings are definately a big deal as far as the RSd's go. I swear the 500.4 is stronger musically than the CEA ratings say as far as output goes. I also know the 1200's are stronger. I would only give the nod in looks....I kinda like the Xenon's. Plus the RSd is BNIB you say. thats all i got to say here.

I can guarantee the 500.4 is the meat and potatoes! Runs cool and needs minimal gainage to get stupid (loud enough for me anyway). In this picture we see a new 500.4 ran channels 1+2 for components crossed high at 400Hz through the on board crossover, channels 3+4 are driving 10" mids low 400Hz through the on board crossover. I was pleased.



Unless there is a compelling argument out there... I will stick with the RSds and find a 1200.1 to complement the 500.4.

Thanks!!!

Xenon is definitely more power and more complex crossover, thermal and control circuitry. But that is not necessarily better as they are known to be buggy.

If it was my car I would do the RSD500.4 especially if its new in a box. Simple, good power, no reliability issues.

I doubt if you would hear a noticeable difference if side by side...

this xenon 1200 dose flex sheet metal like nothing ive seen thou http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hv0tYXerv5I

Never messed with a RSd amp, but I have used and loved many Xenon's. I still use a X100.4 to this day. Wouldn't trade it for the world.

A lot of Xenon fans here! I am surprised actually, the Xenons do not get much press on the phorum IMO.

I admit that the top mount controls are NICE! Plus the clean wire hiding plugs are great.

Who came out of the woodwork with "They both suck"! LOL

I bid Xenons but if you have a RSD new use it
I seen stryker setup in person the 500.4 is a nice looking amp and in his set up does a great job. When i had my 2008 bmw e90 i used the x100.4 loved it the car was a POS

Pillow wrote:Who came out of the woodwork with "They both suck"! LOL

Pillow wrote:A lot of Xenon fans here! I am surprised actually, the Xenons do not get much press on the phorum IMO.

We don't like to embarrass ourselves.

Pillow wrote:A lot of Xenon fans here! I am surprised actually, the Xenons do not get much press on the phorum IMO.

When they work, they are probably the best amps that PG made.

My only qualms were a lack of X10 for the crossover, and the oversized footprint for the monoblocks (X2000.1 prototype put out 2000w in a 1200.1 footprint, so there is a lot of unused real estate in the production amps).

Xenon is also CEA2006 rated. look at the fine print at the top of the spec page of the manual

stipud wrote:

Pillow wrote:A lot of Xenon fans here! I am surprised actually, the Xenons do not get much press on the phorum IMO.

When they work, they are probably the best amps that PG made.

My only qualms were a lack of X10 for the crossover, and the oversized footprint for the monoblocks (X2000.1 prototype put out 2000w in a 1200.1 footprint, so there is a lot of unused real estate in the production amps).

best amps they made? They were alright man but I think you just took too big a hit from your vape......

ttocs wrote:best amps they made? They were alright man but I think you just took too big a hit from your vape......

Try giving me an objective reason they are not?

What other PG amp to date has put out 200x4 at 4 ohms? Xe.Load is in my opinion the best impedance matching circuitry out there, since it doesn't severely restrict the power supply like the JL or other contemporary designs did. Any other audiphile brands would have forced you to load the amp down to 1 or 2 ohms to make the same power that PG did at 4!

And this was the same tried and true triple darlington no less; the X200.4 had 24 output BJTs... twice as many as an MS2250! Big ceramic feedback resistors like the ZPA amps. They were the first PG amps with indented crossovers, and while not having an X10 could at least easily be run in bandpass for a set of midbasses. Top mount controls and fan made installation anywhere a breeze.

Seriously if reliability or cosmetics were not an issue, they would be my pick for best PG amp.

stipud wrote:

ttocs wrote:best amps they made? They were alright man but I think you just took too big a hit from your vape......

Try giving me an objective reason they are not?

What other PG amp to date has put out 200x4 at 4 ohms? Xe.Load is in my opinion the best impedance matching circuitry out there, since it doesn't severely restrict the power supply like the JL or other contemporary designs did. Any other audiphile brands would have forced you to load the amp down to 1 or 2 ohms to make the same power that PG did at 4!

And this was the same tried and true triple darlington no less; the X200.4 had 24 output BJTs... twice as many as an MS2250! Big ceramic feedback resistors like the ZPA amps. They were the first PG amps with indented crossovers, and while not having an X10 could at least easily be run in bandpass for a set of midbasses. Top mount controls and fan made installation anywhere a breeze.

Seriously if reliability or cosmetics were not an issue, they would be my pick for best PG amp.

I'm with Stipud on this one. Xe.Load is great, detented continuosly variable 24db/oct crossovers, fan cooled with a decent sized heat sink, aluminum cover (took a hint after the Ti line), top mounted controls, auxillary power terminals and plenty of power to boot. Just like the ZPA series, they were great audiophile amps, but had issues of not being the most reliable.

To the OP, either one will work fine for you.

having owned a 200.4, 200.2, and a 1200.1, I can indeed say they are very nice. However like mentioned, they are huge, and unreliable sometimes. My 1200.1 quit on me a few years back. The reason they dont get much praise anymore is because there are cheaper, and much more efficient amps out. The 200.4 is the most power 4 channel amp I owned, and it was insane. Even running spl systems, I dont even need that much power for my highs

My trusty m44 actually holds its own for my loud systems ironically, and has never failed once in years.

stipud wrote:

Pillow wrote:A lot of Xenon fans here! I am surprised actually, the Xenons do not get much press on the phorum IMO.

When they work, they are probably the best amps that PG made.

My only qualms were a lack of X10 for the crossover, and the oversized footprint for the monoblocks (X2000.1 prototype put out 2000w in a 1200.1 footprint, so there is a lot of unused real estate in the production amps).

here is your problem, you said it yourself, WHEN you get them to work and then hope that they will continue. Great it had good power output, well I bet jensen made some big amps too but they were on the same line of quality..

here is your problem, you said it yourself, WHEN you get them to work and then hope that they will continue. Great it had good power output, well I bet jensen made some big amps too but they were on the same line of quality..

I've owned two X600.1's, a 1200.1, and I currently run a X200.4 in my winter shitmobile. I haven't had one of them fail yet and the 200.4 has been going strong since summer of 2008. The issue was primarily with a batch of cold solder amps.

ttocs wrote:here is your problem, you said it yourself, WHEN you get them to work and then hope that they will continue. Great it had good power output, well I bet jensen made some big amps too but they were on the same line of quality..

Jensen? Seriously? Does Jensen use Sankens? Triple darlington? Do you understand amp design at all, or are you just trolling?

Cold solder issues were limited to the first batch. As soon as PG realized there was a problem, they went over every board by hand afterwards and they became quite reliable. Anyone with a warranty had their amps fixed for free. The only reason the Xenon cold solder issue was a problem was because of PG's distributor leak, which meant the vast majority of the amps sold online did NOT have a warranty and would not get fixed for free. That's why more people online were vocal about it.

There are lots of people here that run these amps, who haven't had a single issue. Comparing their pride and joy to Jensen amps is downright insulting.