Phoenix Gold Phorum

what is the difference between the 2?, is the eq manual and a processor electrical?

I found this..

http://www99.shopping.com/xPO-Phoenix-Gold-TI-EQ30

Are these hard to find now?

I'm guessing the titanium's are better than the tantrum?

Or is it just a different case finish?

An EQ is a processor!

A processor is anything that processes the signal. Crossovers, EQs, line drivers, etc. are all processors. It's a term used to describe electronic components in the signal path that are used to do something to the signal.

With PG processors, the finish differences are almost always just the cases (as far as I know). The Ti and Tantrum EQ-30 are otherwise identical I'm pretty sure. I think they are even the same as the EQ-230 (MS, M era), just in updated cases.

eq230 and 232 are slightly differant, the later 232's had a balanced output (as well as input).

marko wrote:eq230 and 232 are slightly differant, the later 232's had a balanced output (as well as input).

Yeah, the 230 and 232 are slightly different. Are the T/Ti EQ-30s the same as the EQ-230, EQ232 or neither?

I'm using the Audiocontrol Four.1i EQ and it sounds great.

fuzzysnuggleduck wrote: Are the T/Ti EQ-30s the same as the EQ-230, EQ232 or neither?

Exactly the same only difference is the above mentioned balance input/output and the case which was made to match the current line of amps at that time.

Am i right in thinking (after reading EQ manuals from the PG FTP site) that they only affect 2 channels? (i.e the front).

What if you want to apply the eq to all 4 channels? (front and rear) without loosing your fader on your head unit

Use 2 EQ's - one front, one rear - if you need to maintain fader control.

HH

think about it though, if u have one rca out, then a line driver, and old skool pg used to show this for an entire system, i think it was b/c u could balance it better, then u have a crossover, or eq, then rcaas to each seperate amp, i think they showed it this way b/c entire balance for a system, but i used to have seperate line drivers etc. and used them, but ive kinda gone back to basics, i use one rca out, to a line driver , then to a mx3i xover, then the seperate rcas goto the seperate amps , sending the individual frequencies for those speakers, but whatever works best for you-hh is right u can use two, and it would mean more control

marko wrote:eq230 and 232 are slightly differant, the later 232's had a balanced output (as well as input).

The EQ230 has balanced in and out as well (I have one) BUT, here is the kicker... instead of a cat 5 looking internet plug (like the Denfords and late model TBAT stuff as well as ALL the ZPAs), it had a funny looking 7 pin round style plug that looks sort of like an Alpine changer or AI-net connection...

Finding one of those for my EQ230 (transmitter) has been a real fun time.

Since I am on the subject, if anyone has a working TBAT (transmitter) with the old style round plug, feel free to PM me if you want to sell it. (ESP A FRANKED ONE!!!)

So really, any PG EQ of any age / product line is a quality item?

finkle636 wrote:So really, any PG EQ of any age / product line is a quality item?

yes, absolutely.

If you want the best imo, here are my fav top two...

1. EQ232 full balanced into a ZPX2 full balanced
2. TiDEQ digital laptop EQ... Run this into a AX406A or a ZPX2 unbalanced.

Oohh...funny that people should be talking about this...

I dont have them for sale at the moment...but I have an TI Eq230 and a TI DEQ comp.

The EQ230 has balanced in and out as well (I have one) BUT

i'm 99% certain it hasn't! i've got both eq230 and later eq232, the 232 has cat5e style balanced in and out, the 230 only has balanced in, in the form of a mini-din connctor.

you can use a later tba with early eq230, just have to get a cat5e cable (shielded), cut one end off and bung a mini-din connector on like i did!

mark.

STROKD wrote:The EQ230 has balanced in and out as well (I have one) BUT, here is the kicker... instead of a cat 5 looking internet plug (like the Denfords and late model TBAT stuff as well as ALL the ZPAs), it had a funny looking 7 pin round style plug that looks sort of like an Alpine changer or AI-net connection...

It's a 6-pin DIN connector. Same as PS/2 for keyboards and mice on PCs used between the eras of serial and USB buses.

STROKD wrote:Finding one of those for my EQ230 (transmitter) has been a real fun time.

If you know how to solder, finding two busted keyboards and some cable should be easy enough.

STROKD wrote: Since I am on the subject, if anyone has a working TBAT (transmitter) with the old style round plug, feel free to PM me if you want to sell it. (ESP A FRANKED ONE!!!)

I think I'll be selling mine in a couple months... but it's not franked.

This is my BNIB TBA [round plug]...the type you mentioned isn't it?
Damn shame there's such a huge GAP between us; this set is looking for a new home.

Whats the advantage (in sound quaity) of using these over just running a 5 mtr RCA cable?

I assume thats what these are for?, running a cable the length of the car from the head unit to the amp (or EQ)?

finkle636 wrote:Whats the advantage (in sound quaity) of using these over just running a 5 mtr RCA cable?

I assume thats what these are for?, running a cable the length of the car from the head unit to the amp (or EQ)?

Balanced circuits have inherent noise rejection. They provide better quality signal in noisy environments.

It's a line driver. Your TBA transmitter is up front, your receiver (or EQ) is in the back.

Especially in our modern cars, with all kind of electronic systems, the chance of getting noise on your rca cable to the trunk is substancial.
With this sytem for transporting the HU signal, that risk is much smaller.

some people say unless your running balanced from the headunit right up to the amps then you don't benefit, but i've run balanced from the headunit only to the eq and benefited in a big noise reduction and elliminated annoying alternator whine...

i'll be running balanced again in my next system

How come PG don't make stuff like this anymore?

by that i mean amps with balanced inputs and EQ's for there current ranges.

Also the Titanium series of items are very hard to find aswell (or am i just not lookin in the right places)

It seems surprising to me that the processor equipment of 10 years + ago is of a higher level than that released today.

finkle636 wrote:by that i mean amps with balanced inputs and EQ's for there current ranges.

Also the Titanium series of items are very hard to find aswell (or am i just not lookin in the right places)

It seems surprising to me that the processor equipment of 10 years + ago is of a higher level than that released today.

So many processors these days are digital, and incorporated in the HU. These old PG EQs are just good ol' made in the USA analog equipment.

But the SQ of these seperate EQ's is better right ?

(please say yes as ive bought a nak cd-400 with virtually no usable adjustment on it over an alpine head unit.)