Question on Quality of Brands
#26
thats why i wonder how the SR6500 set sounds! lol, there's no MOMO on that set!
http://www.polkaudio.com/car/product.php?name=sr6500
http://www.polkaudio.com/car/product.php?name=sr6500
#27
Originally Posted by Sad_Savant
i've never owned a polk component setup, but i did have Polk/Momo 4x6's as my highs and 6x9's for mids in my cavi...yeah that lasted for about one day. The 4x6's sounded like **** for about an hour then they shredded. They couldn't handle the weak *** power of RF 150.2 amp that had Bass Boost off completely...and i had them bridged with the 6x9's...and before anyone says anything, i know they were wire correctly...They sold their quality out when they put on the MOMO name.
#28
I'm positive RF had a 150.2. and yes it was a 2 channel. It's self bridging when you use the hi-pass input wire instead of the standard allen head connectors. I'm willing to bet if you do a search for RF 150.2 you'll get a response on it....it's also known as the 150S...
As far as underpowering the speakers...I can't give you exact RMS, but it did power 2 Kenwood DB+ 10"s for about 3 months...then i upgraded to a new amp for the subs and used the 150 to power my mid's and high's....plenty of power to go around for all 4 of them....As a matter of fact, once i ditched the Polk's and threw in the Lanzar 3-way's with built in tweeters I noticed a drastic improvement, with no changes to wiring. I just feel Polk/Momo's are junk.
As far as underpowering the speakers...I can't give you exact RMS, but it did power 2 Kenwood DB+ 10"s for about 3 months...then i upgraded to a new amp for the subs and used the 150 to power my mid's and high's....plenty of power to go around for all 4 of them....As a matter of fact, once i ditched the Polk's and threw in the Lanzar 3-way's with built in tweeters I noticed a drastic improvement, with no changes to wiring. I just feel Polk/Momo's are junk.
#29
oK, I did find the 150S, but I doubt you could buy one outside of a pawn shop today. It's rated @ 75watts per 2 channels @ 2 ohms (150 watts bridged in 1 channel)
75 watts gives you about 37.5 if you ran two speakers per channel wired parallel. Power levels were adequate, but high level inputs are not condusive to quality output, typically. Bass boost or not, I wouldn't send any bass to a 4x6 speaker which is a 4" "woofer" and a tweeter installed on the same plate.
Anyway good speakers need good power (and good enclosures). I bet the lanzars were designed to be more "free air" and just plopped into the door panels and forgotten. Their power requirements were probably much less, and they probably had a larger woofer for the mid bass as well (I doubt the 150S has much in terms of crossover potential) Their tighter suspension and thicker surrounds for the more brutal sound levels need more energy for the same levels of output. Under powering through an cheap amplifier on high level input from whatever head unit, well you can see why I pressed for further explanation.
Not doubting your belief that those speakers sucked, but being an analyst (does it show?) it's hard to substantiate your findings based upon the facts as you presented.
75 watts gives you about 37.5 if you ran two speakers per channel wired parallel. Power levels were adequate, but high level inputs are not condusive to quality output, typically. Bass boost or not, I wouldn't send any bass to a 4x6 speaker which is a 4" "woofer" and a tweeter installed on the same plate.
Anyway good speakers need good power (and good enclosures). I bet the lanzars were designed to be more "free air" and just plopped into the door panels and forgotten. Their power requirements were probably much less, and they probably had a larger woofer for the mid bass as well (I doubt the 150S has much in terms of crossover potential) Their tighter suspension and thicker surrounds for the more brutal sound levels need more energy for the same levels of output. Under powering through an cheap amplifier on high level input from whatever head unit, well you can see why I pressed for further explanation.
Not doubting your belief that those speakers sucked, but being an analyst (does it show?) it's hard to substantiate your findings based upon the facts as you presented.
#30
i don't mind the analysis....that's how we all learn lessons....and i just learned one heck of a lesson....never post anything that you might be able to dig into again!!!! Just kidding...thanks for the lesson though, seriously....you made a couple of real good points that I really didn't take into consideration at that time...although at that time i was just getting into stereo system setup...and it was my first...nonetheless, that was still a good lesson you just gave....
I...I....think i just got owned...lol....
I...I....think i just got owned...lol....
#33
Here you go.....I dont know if this is any good or not....just thought I would share...lol
Phoenix Gold
Phoenix Gold
#34
i had both the titanium 5 and 6 elites, lol.. they were good speakers.. crossovers sucked tho, so i only had them for about 2 months each. i then switched to morels which were probably IMO twice as good, and wanted more power (needed another amp, dammit!)
PS- michael i love that sign in your avatar! is it somthing photoshopped or is there an actual sign like that out somewhere?
PS- michael i love that sign in your avatar! is it somthing photoshopped or is there an actual sign like that out somewhere?
Last edited by Strider0O0; 04-23-2005 at 08:49 AM.
#35
#36
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
j18willis
Forced Induction & N20 Tech
2
10-08-2006 08:38 PM