I've currently got two amps to run my subs and I only need one. I previously had the last series PHD2 running them and after earthquake repaired it the power seems to fluctuate. I saw a ppi "pro mos 50" in an art 600 shell (guts are an a600.2) on ebay and I couldn't resist since I'd never heard of a 2 ohm mono stable art model in that configuration. After remembering the lame rca jacks ppi used (way too small) that allow the rca cables to become loose and loose contact easily, I squeezed the rca cable ends and now the amp is consistently getting both channel signals and running strong. It sounds great, but definately can't hang with the phD2 for damping and raw power. When I first got the phD2 it seemed to always be out of phase with my high amplifier and always stood out, not just because of power level because I adjusted it as closely as I could. The art amp seems to be more in time or phase with the other art 600.2 I'm running my mids/highs on.
Its a tough decision because I haven't gotten off my lazy **** and done any checking on the phd2 (scared to fry it) and I like the idea of having two matching sized art amps. I've also heard class "d" amps suck for sq, blah,blah,blah.. but I've heard many systems (home and car) with class "d" and they sound great IMO.
If you had the choice to run either of the two (assuming they would be working in perfect condition), which would you choose? Is there a difference in sq/spl that makes one more favorable over the other?
Its a tough decision because I haven't gotten off my lazy **** and done any checking on the phd2 (scared to fry it) and I like the idea of having two matching sized art amps. I've also heard class "d" amps suck for sq, blah,blah,blah.. but I've heard many systems (home and car) with class "d" and they sound great IMO.
If you had the choice to run either of the two (assuming they would be working in perfect condition), which would you choose? Is there a difference in sq/spl that makes one more favorable over the other?
I think I heard those crickets chirping too! 
I wish I could give you a good answer to your questions; however, I have never had the opportunity to hear an Earthquake or a PPI amplifier so I cannot share any personnel experience with them. The only chances I get to hear any amps are if I get a broken one then repair it.
As for your question: I guess it all depends on which amp you like the sound of most, the high power from the Earthquake or the easy blending of the PPI? I myself like high power amps most of all as I am really into high SPL, so the Earthquake may be my personal choice, though I do like nice sound for all around listening for SQ applications and the PPI may be better suited for that since you say it seems to blend or phase better. Again it just depends on what you like best. I wonder why you can’t get the Earthquake in phase like the PPI.
I know amps can definitely sound different, as is why I say it is personal preference. Example: I like the sound of Bipolar outputs (if I have that correct) rather then FETS for highs / full range speakers, but for bass / subwoofers either will do as long as it has more than enough power to drive the load. I have a Rockford Fosgate 800a2 with FET output transistors and I also have a Coustic 600SE with Triple Darlington outputs, and I must say I prefer the sound of the Coustic for full range speakers & the 800a2 for subs. Don't get me wrong, the 800a2 is a very nice sounding amp and I love it, but I prefer the clarity of the Coustic on full range. The 800a2 puts out a bit more power, but the Coustic is still pretty powerful as well.
I know Rockford Fosgate and Coustic are completely different brands than you stated as well as my example, I was just showing personal preferences, and it really comes down to what type of sound your looking for out of the amp & which one meets your needs most. Maybe some knowledgeable people will chime in with some good reasons to choose one amp over the other.
Very nice amps by the way, I really like the look of that PPI ''PRO MOS 50'', looks well built too! I seen pictures of the PH-D2 on the ampguts site, looks nice as well. To sum it up as to what amp I would use out of the two? If the Earthquake does infact put out more power then the PPI, I would probably use the Earthquake. But that’s just me! Take Care!
I wish I could give you a good answer to your questions; however, I have never had the opportunity to hear an Earthquake or a PPI amplifier so I cannot share any personnel experience with them. The only chances I get to hear any amps are if I get a broken one then repair it.
As for your question: I guess it all depends on which amp you like the sound of most, the high power from the Earthquake or the easy blending of the PPI? I myself like high power amps most of all as I am really into high SPL, so the Earthquake may be my personal choice, though I do like nice sound for all around listening for SQ applications and the PPI may be better suited for that since you say it seems to blend or phase better. Again it just depends on what you like best. I wonder why you can’t get the Earthquake in phase like the PPI.
I know amps can definitely sound different, as is why I say it is personal preference. Example: I like the sound of Bipolar outputs (if I have that correct) rather then FETS for highs / full range speakers, but for bass / subwoofers either will do as long as it has more than enough power to drive the load. I have a Rockford Fosgate 800a2 with FET output transistors and I also have a Coustic 600SE with Triple Darlington outputs, and I must say I prefer the sound of the Coustic for full range speakers & the 800a2 for subs. Don't get me wrong, the 800a2 is a very nice sounding amp and I love it, but I prefer the clarity of the Coustic on full range. The 800a2 puts out a bit more power, but the Coustic is still pretty powerful as well.
I know Rockford Fosgate and Coustic are completely different brands than you stated as well as my example, I was just showing personal preferences, and it really comes down to what type of sound your looking for out of the amp & which one meets your needs most. Maybe some knowledgeable people will chime in with some good reasons to choose one amp over the other.
Very nice amps by the way, I really like the look of that PPI ''PRO MOS 50'', looks well built too! I seen pictures of the PH-D2 on the ampguts site, looks nice as well. To sum it up as to what amp I would use out of the two? If the Earthquake does infact put out more power then the PPI, I would probably use the Earthquake. But that’s just me! Take Care!
it ultimately depends on what you want. If sound q is of utmost importance then go ppi all the way but theres no way that the ppi can come close to the output of the phd2 and in my opinion the phd2 doesn't really sound terrible.It just needs to be tweaked like anything else.with the right EQ and enclosure that earthquake will sound fine. That being said I would run the PPI just because i've always wanted an a600 and i know that it has plenty of output for my taste.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.