I have been a die hard phoenix fan since i bought my first MS-2125 in 1995 and to this day that is my favorite amplifier of all time as i have 3. (2 in use and 1 BNIB). My local shop that i have been going to since 1993 was always an authorized phoenix gold dealer until about 2006-2007 when the brand was no longer worth carrying in a high end stereo shop. The reps have been trying to get this shop to carry the new stuff ever since AAMP has taken over the brand and they finally said ok, send us a few amps to try out. I was on hand when the new product came in and the packaging and appearance of the amp was very nice and high quality, what we all came to expect from phoenix in the past. To be able to sell the new stuff the owner wanted to test out the amp first hand for a week or 2 so he knew what he and the salemen had to work with. They did an exact change out of amplifiers in the stores demo car that is outfitted with an alpine 9887, audison bit one processor, 2 sets of hertz mille 6.5 components up front, and hertz coaxs in the rear and a single hertz mille 12. i have to say that the system with the original audison LRx 5.1 sounded absolutely incredible on all types of music across the board and made each and every note coming from all the speakers sound so full and when called upon that 5 channel amp pushed that 1 12" sub to 145db!! (on a term pro meter at the last local db drag). I like the audison products but, still being a life long phoenix fan i was anxious to see if phoenix could come back from the dead and have another MS type sound quality amplifier. First impressions of the amp is that it is big and classy looking but sadly it has a made in Korea sticker on the back on a lighter note on the circuit board it says " more complicated than your ex-girlfriend" internal construction looks good it has power rails not wires like most new amps but not like the old MS. anyway sound quality is a total fail, falls flat on its face next to the Audison music sounds hollow and weak and as for the sub channel it says 1000 watts at 1 ohm but it was a weak 1000watts, a $300 alpine entry level amp puts it to shame. i am going to give them a week or so to dial it in and listen again before i make my final judgement. The $500 difference in cost between the audison ($1499) and the phoenix ($999) is the only advantage the phoenix amp has and having heard both i would rather pay the extra coin to get the far superior product. More updated to follow after next week when i sit and listen again. feedback on the review is much appreciated.
doesnt seem like a true 1000 watts. it may be 1000 watts but the 1000 watts coming out of the audison amp seems to control the sub so much better, tighter, faster, and just plain louder.
i guess it all boils down to i was hoping that the amp was going to be great and i was just dissappointed. put it up against a different 5 channel and it would probably do alot better but against the audison it was just no comparison.
66GTO-MS2125 wrote:doesnt seem like a true 1000 watts. it may be 1000 watts but the 1000 watts coming out of the audison amp seems to control the sub so much better, tighter, faster, and just plain louder.
thats because its not 1000rms its 800 per the manual. if you look close all the ratings on the ti line are misleading. the ti2500.1 is not 2500w its less they are using the dynamic numbers.
66GTO-MS2125 wrote:doesnt seem like a true 1000 watts. it may be 1000 watts but the 1000 watts coming out of the audison amp seems to control the sub so much better, tighter, faster, and just plain louder.
thats because its not 1000rms its 800 per the manual. if you look close all the ratings on the ti line are misleading. the ti2500.1 is not 2500w its less they are using the dynamic numbers.
Todd is correct about the amp specs and I can totally understand the frustration these specs may cause, but there is something else to also consider. Both the Audison and the entry level Alpine you mentioned are optimized for 2 ohm mono loads while the Ti is going to put out the most rms power at a 1 ohm load. Without swapping out the Hertz sub in order to load it down the Ti is going to only feed the sub around 500 rms.
66GTO, thanks for your feedback. Real world results on the new Ti lineup are a bit scarce around here and always welcome. We just need to make sure we take into account as many of the variables as possible when making comparisons. Unfortunately for PG, the Audison should really outshine it on the 4 channel section as well as the sub output. I'm a really big fan of the staggered output on amps like the Audison as it delivers the power where it is most needed. Properly setup, the Audison will deliver almost twice the rms power to the components in comparison to the PG Ti.
66GTO-MS2125 wrote:doesnt seem like a true 1000 watts. it may be 1000 watts but the 1000 watts coming out of the audison amp seems to control the sub so much better, tighter, faster, and just plain louder.
thats because its not 1000rms its 800 per the manual. if you look close all the ratings on the ti line are misleading. the ti2500.1 is not 2500w its less they are using the dynamic numbers.
Todd is correct about the amp specs and I can totally understand the frustration these specs may cause, but there is something else to also consider. Both the Audison and the entry level Alpine you mentioned are optimized for 2 ohm mono loads while the Ti is going to put out the most rms power at a 1 ohm load. Without swapping out the Hertz sub in order to load it down the Ti is going to only feed the sub around 500 rms.
66GTO, thanks for your feedback. Real world results on the new Ti lineup are a bit scarce around here and always welcome. We just need to make sure we take into account as many of the variables as possible when making comparisons. Unfortunately for PG, the Audison should really outshine it on the 4 channel section as well as the sub output. I'm a really big fan of the staggered output on amps like the Audison as it delivers the power where it is most needed. Properly setup, the Audison will deliver almost twice the rms power to the components in comparison to the PG Ti.
All this says , is that you can`t compare those amps agains each other this way... they are in different price range too...
Its like comparing a 100Hp car against an 300Hp car... There is no point.
Old School PG Fan/Collector & Jeep fanatic...
Madman in a nuclear mode!!
2x FAS, 3xReactor, MS275, MS2125, M25, M44, 2xMPS2240, ZX450, 3xZX350, 2xZX250, 8xPG Original Jacket, Box full of BassQube`s Xmax8,10,12, 2 sets of BostonAcoustics 6.5.3 + + +
My opinion on the subject is to wait until they dial in the BitOne to the TI. At that point I think you will get a better A-B comparison. Honestly the BitOne is a make or break type of piece.
The somewhat misleading specs on the Ti amps and after realizing how to read/understand them, I was turned away from them. I too, am a life long fan of PG, but I went with Audison LRx5.1k as well. I originally wanted a Ti800.4 and a Ti2500.1
Compare the power output of those two Ti amps to the 5.1k and the footprint between the two, along with the overall costs of the 2 Ti's and the 1 Audison, the Audison wins hands down.
For the PG amp, and the PG name, I hope that a weeks worth of dialing in will yield better results.
"ZPA's will have the same sound essentially as you get from the MS, they just feature a bigger shinier set of balls."
The audison puts 170x2 to the mids instead of the 90x2 from the PG amp as well. I can't say you're really comparing apples to apples, considering the audison has nearly double the wattage to everything but the tweeters
I agree though that the price difference isn't too high for audiophiles like us to justify moving to the audison.
Audison makes a darn good amp, but this review doesn't make sense.
We had a demo vehicle at a recent show in Germany with a Ti1600.5 powering two Ti2 12d4's and it will hurt you for bass output. Fully controlled, extremely dynamic and loud. The front and rear channels were equally impressive.
"a $300 alpine entry level amp puts it to shame" This is unlikely and makes no sense. Which Alpine amplifier are you comparing the Ti1600.5 sub section to?
I think there is more to this than just the amp. Perhaps its not tuned/some settings need to be adjusted on the Bit One. Both these amps are damn good, LRX has a bit more power but it costs more. But there is no way Ti1600.5 performance falls completely flat.
Reading all these posts has really got me concerned about purchasing the Ti1600.5 amp. I went to 3 diff dealerships to get quotes on a complete overhaul from hu, to amp, subs etc... I never heard of PG however the guys at this one shop obviously were really pumping it up so I was about to get this amp (a stiff $1099 which I think I could get more for my buck with 2 separate amps) along with 2 subs, Ti210d4 (10"). Of course the other shop was selling alpine amps/jlaudio subs and the third shop hertz subs/audison amps. I could go with any system however the PG dealership was the cheapest setup as well as the more professional. Now that Ive read these posts, Im thinking I'd regret going with this PG setup and might as well spend the few hundred more to get one of the other two systems. Is there anyone out there with a positive experience with this particular amp or subwoofer? Are they matched okay where I wont have any unforseen problems? being I dont know anything about these different aspects of a stereo system. Any help or response would be greatly appreciated..... Thank You!
I would NOT be concerned about purchasing the 1600.5. I have owned several different PG amps over the years, old to new and from entry level to top of the line and I have NEVER heard a bad sounding PG amp. The 1600.5 is built using the same triple darlington setup as they have been for years. I was contemplating purchasing this amplifier, but due to its size, I couldn't fit it in my install and decided to go with the new SD1300.5 full range class D 5-channel amplifier instead (which sounds good). The first post in this thread is comparing the Audison LRx5.1 to the Ti1600.5 by doing a direct swap, and apparently no tuning was done at the time and no updates have been made after tuning to see how it sounds. Being that the two amps have different power ratings and different crossover slopes, no wonder the PG didn't sound as good on a system tuned for the Audison. Not knocking Audison, because they do make great products, but I think a fair comparison would involve having the system tuned to each amplifier.
pg has been around for decades in the car audio game. They are a quality manf and stand behind their products. You would be happy with a system made of up any of the gear you named as it is all top notch honestly but out of all the names you listed pg has been around for longer, those guys learned from what pg put put in its early years and built on it...
what else can I say I am a grumpy asshole most of the time.
Well thank you for the replies, it has made me feel a little better. I read what the PG guy said and I think Im going to do this 5 ch amp with two Ti2 12" subs instead of 10's. Really dont know what would be better but I just dont want to regret anything once I get it installed. I was looking at the Pioneer avic z130bt head unit but think I'll wait for the 2012 z140 instead. Until then, thanks once again for helping me with the decision to go with the PG amp and subs. If you know of a better double din hu please let me know...
Hey Morgan, I'm thinking a higher end 10" than a lower end 12" sub so with that said, what 10" woofer would u recommend to get max performance with the 1600.5 amp? Also, what is ur honest opinion comparing this amp with the audison voce av5.1k that I just seen today? Thanks in advance
The sub section of the Ti1600.5 delivers plenty of power for just about any woofer (except something really large). We have used two Ti212d2's on the sub channel and its sounds fantastic. What sub(s) did you have in mind?
The VOCE 5.1 is a very nice amp, excellent build quality. I have recently spent some time listening to the LRx5.1, it does sounds nice. I didn't listen to it in a A/B comparison scenario with Ti1600.5, personally I think you would be hard pressed to hear any major differences of the two amplifiers in a car. Installation and speaker locations will be a much bigger factor in how your car sounds.
The VOCE 5.1 is quite a bit more money ($1000 MSRP vs $1600 MSRP). The staggered powered some guys may/may not like, the sub section is not stable 1 one ohm. However, its smaller in size and it has several bells and whistles (High Level Inputs, optional digital input module) the Ti1600.5 doesn't have.
Both are great amps just depends how you want to spend your hard earned dollars.
So I finally committed and this is the setup I have on order. The Pioneer Avic Z130bt Head Unit, back up camera, PG 1600.5 5-channel amp, PG 10" subs, PG front door speakers (dont have paperwork in front of me) but is like Ti65 cs ??? and the PG 5.25 coaxial for the back doors. Im really excited to hear them being the shop I went to did not have a demo station set up for me to hear anything. Scheduled for period between Feb 12 - Feb 20 to be installed. I hope I dont regret anything because I am just going on the salesman's word.
Oh well, will let you all know how it turns out... Thanks for all your help, it really helped me in my decision...
on a lighter note on the circuit board it says " more complicated than your ex-girlfriend" internal construction looks good it has power rails not wires like most new amps but not like the old MS. anyway sound quality is a total fail, falls flat on its face next to the Audison music sounds hollow and weak and as for the sub channel it says 1000 watts at 1 ohm but it was a weak 1000watts, a $300 alpine entry level amp puts it to shame. i am going to give them a week or so to dial it in and listen again before i make my final judgement. The $500 difference in cost between the audison ($1499) and the phoenix ($999) is the only advantage the phoenix amp has and having heard both i would rather pay the extra coin to get the far superior product. More updated to follow after next week when i sit and listen again. 
feedback on the review is much appreciated.
