Rep Power: 347

I currently have a sealed Shiva running only off of about 150 watts. I think that it gets to a good volume now, I don't need it to get any louder. If i get a new amp, say around 500 watts, what will that do? I imagine it will make it get louder, but say at the same volume, will it sound exactly the same as the 150 watts I have now?

Will more power make the bass sound more crisp, like, keep up with the fast beats better?


If I can benefit from a new amp, what's the cheapest amp that puts aout about that much power? It can be a Class D and I don't need any special features.


Thanks, Ed

 
Rep Power: 346

Ed, if you don't want the sub to get any louder why are you wanting more power? Or are you getting an amp for a deal or something?


The thing about the Shiva is that it can get loud of off minumum power. I also don't think it needs more then 350-400 watts of power to reach it's full capabilities...but if you have more power then that you can just keep you gain down to compensate for the extra power.

One thing that I know for sure is that the sub will bump hard and Deeeeep in a large ported enclosure.

 
Rep Power: 337

will be louder for sure, only sound changes will be colorations that the amplifier makes. should be difficult at best to hear the difference concerning sub-bass

i think you will be alot happier with more power. you can achieve same volume levels as before at much less stress on your amplifier. plus, its always nice to have the headroom

 
Rep Power: 0

actually, if you are looking for a small amount of power, and if you are looking for straight quality, check into maybe getting a class A/B amp. 200-300 watts of a/b at 4 ohms shouldnt be hard to find at a decent price.

think of it this way. lets say you want a car to drive at 120 miles per hour all day every day. would you buy a civic, or go for a faster car.

 
Rep Power: 347

Would more power help at all making it sound more scrisp, like have more control over teh cone?

Also, and suggestions on a cheap 2 channel amp bridgeable to 4 ohms mono?

 
Rep Power: 0

it might, but class a/b would have even more control.

 
Rep Power: 0

Try to find a used PG or something. I have an XS2500, bridgeable into 500watts RMS at 4 ohms, Class A/B, you'd have lots of overhead. heh.

 
Rep Power: 0

Go with a larger enclosure so you have a lower QTC... this will give you better transient response. Them Shiva's are nice, but they require huge enclosures. I would drop it in like 3 cu ft sealed with about 300w.

 
Rep Power: 337

oh no way, 3 cubes is WAY too big. in our civics, 1.8 is ideal. the largest enclosure I ever put a shiva in was 2.4 sealed, and i must admit, the low frequency extension was paramount. AWESOME range, bested many 15's that i know of (eat yoru heart out w0!).

but there was so much slop its performance was pretty much limited to tones, musics like electronica and rap. since the guy listened to eclusively rap, we were fine.

but 3 cubes sealed? id think youd loose all seblance of control over the cone, if not at low, then at high volumes. I highly reccommend agaisnt putting a shiva in 3 cubes sealed.

I aree that the shiva is a HUGE box woofer, and i second that 300 rms is the perfect amount of power for a shiva, but 3 cube? 1.8 is the magic number for a civic!

 
Rep Power: 0

How do you figure 3 cubes is too big? With the driver mounted, it will now be appox. 2.89 cu ft internal. Now using the ts paremeters from adire, this will give you a QTC of .66... You are saying a QTC of .66 is too low and will not have control over the cone? Do you not realize that the lower QTC (larger enclosure) will have more control over the cone? better transient response.

I guess it is all based on personal preference... I am a SQ guy!

 
Rep Power: 0

winisd isnt god... there are flaws in the program, and ive heard adire reccomend sizes as small as 1.4 cf. for example, take a kicker comp vr 10 and put it in winisd, itll read some ridiculous amount of airspace. i believe practical experience goes way farther than number, i myself own 3 shiva, only run 2 in my car, and think that 3 is excessive airspace for them.

 
Rep Power: 0

I do not use winisd, not sure where you got that idea. And I speak from personal experience, unlike a lot of peeps. I have had 3 shiva's and 3 brahmas to this date!

Once again, 3 cu ft is not too big... My calculations are correct since I use formulas, not box building programs. If you wanted the ideal SQ install, you would go even bigger for a QTC of .577 like my Brahma enclosures.

 
Rep Power: 337

i like the "i am an SQ guy" remark, it does a great job of discrediting me as someone to listen to for reccommendations as to what will and will not sound good.

as to your statements of qualifications to judge, as opposed to displaying knowledge, I have a quote i tote for that:

"No man who had truly had such accomplishments and financial cushioning to support such education and equipment would be so lacking in ego that they felt they had to stress how qualified they were in terms of things they owned, and paper certificates...Rather than being able to prove their worth by displaying knowledge."

as to yoru knowledge, you are relying too heavily on QTC. case in point, the box i built for a buddy for 4 kenwood tornado 12's. took SCRUPULOUS time and care to ensure the box was built to have the ideal Q of .707, to ensure that there was no extra suspension to real life than was required to get teh woofers to play ideally.

the box sounded like ****.

so I established at that time that QTC isnt eerything, and in fact means nothing. those woofers in a rebuilt box sounded infinitely better with a Q of 1.31. talk abotu "overdamped"!

ever model up a comp VR? needs what, 17 cubes for ideal Q? Q is a bullshit figure. it is not a requirement for ideal sound.

"Do you not realize that the lower QTC (larger enclosure) will have more control over the cone?"

nope, this one is new to me! i have no doubts that nearly everyone here, including you, drives your amplifier to clip at least a LITTLE bit. some overdrive their amplifiers a whole lot. otehrs amplifiers jsut plain sucks. your telling me that at high volumes, when the subwoofer is getting a signal thats dirty as hell, that a Q of LESS than .707, meaning less than ideal and perfect suspension, will yield MORE cone control over a box that exurts a higher pressure, thus a greater tendancy to return the cone to zero position? there just is no way.

why do you think all manufacturers reccommend a box just a tiny bit smaller than will yield a Q of .707? increased power handling, longer woofer life, able to take more abuse, the list goes on!

and finally, you want to call qualifications into the pissing match? youve owned three shiva? Ive installed five, ranging from 1 cube sealed to 2.4 sealed. 1 cube sounded like ****. 2.4 sounded liek **** playing most music. 1.8 sounded perfect. winISD reccommends 1.8 1.8 falls within adires reccommended box spec. in fact, arire says that 1.6 cubes stuffed yields a Q of .7..... right on target!

i think we can omit yoru experience with three brahma from a debate about shiva, as they have nothing to do with shiva.

so.... "once again" 3 cubes is fantastically too large of an enclosure, that will reduce powerhandling to nil and have comparitavely no control over the cone, far worse transient response than 1.8 sealed, which is very nearly perfect.

you use formulas and not programs? did you know those programs are BASED on those same formulas you use? by touting the reliability of yrou formulas, you tout the relaibility of winISD.

so, you may deem yourself an SQ guy, and you may be able to BS yoru way though convincing most others, I dont buy it. obviously Lud doesnt, either.

but how about it? your from SoCal. Im on teh central coast. maybe you wouldnt be abject to a little competition. I pit my car agasint yours, since you are an "SQ" guy. Ill pit my tempest, a lower level woofer, agsaint yoru high end brahmas, or whatever else you got.

there are competitions coming up in late summer, I will be going to. if you think that 3 cubes sealed for a Q of .5 or whatever rediculously low number is ideal for SQ, and have followed suit with yrou brahma, or any other woofer in yrou car, I will crush you at competition.

what do you say? you wanna meet up at competition and see whos knowledge has really yielded better real world results?

 
Rep Power: 0

I don't know why you seem to try to prove yourself to me every time I post on this forum! You oviously have to prove yourself to your fellow members, and hate it when someone with more knowledge than you comes around, thus, felling the need to argue every time I post.

You can say all you want cause I'm just sitting here laughing just like the last time to tried to argue with me about rear fill, since I didn't post a 1 page explination why rear fill is not needed!

As far as meeting up, I am more than willing considering I might be one of elementals Southern Cali reps!

 
Rep Power: 0

faintreality, im not on anyone's side here, but i figure the reason whiterabbit feels the need to write such long drawn out replies to your posts is because whenever you post, you leave an essence of "high and mighty sq guy". realize that everyone in the world doesnt base their lives on the autosound2000 cd collection.

as to that, you have no clue if you know more or less than him, or me, or anyone here for that matter. i know the formulas for all these measurements, yet i choose to use programs because it makes my life easier.

as to the shiva situation. ****, if they start to bottom out unclipped at 400-500 rms in 1.8 cf sealed boxes, i cant even imagine how low the power handling will be in a 3 cubic foot box. after power handling, i bet it would actually be quite muddy in something that big.

 
Rep Power: 0

How do I leave an essence of "high and mighty SQ guy"? I said I would drop it in a 3cu ft sealed enclosure... Am I not alowed to say what I would do? I then say I have had 3 shivas and 3 brahmas in regards to your remarks of "i believe practical experience goes way farther than number", thus, basically telling you I am speaking from experience and not numbers.

Then WhiteRabiit comes along and makes and *** out of himself like he does quite often by blowing everything out of porportion and nit picking on everything as if he has something to prove to all of you guys! Shows a lot of maturity on his part!

Everyone has there own personal preference and opinions. I like sealed enclosures with a very low QTC... If you guys don't, that is fine. I am not here to tell you want to do, but to argue and try to make it seem like I am wrong or arn't as knowledgeable, or to take my post out of porportion to make it seem like something it isn't is just rediculious and very immature.

I realize this is normal for you guys to read since Whiterabbit is the hard head in this forum and is the "know it all", but I don't feel the need to argue back and forth bringing my self down to the same level of im-maturity, when you all oviously arn't willing to learn or accept my difference in opionion, when in fact it is all personal opinion like I mentioned several post up!

Anyway, I am done with this post... I still will recommend the 3 cu ft sealed enclosure to "make the bass sound more crisp, like, keep up with the fast beats better" like the original post asked. If that is too big, which I agree it is (the sacrifice you have to make with the Shiva), then go smaller... But don't tell me it is bad, worse, and all the other crap cause I have already done it and you are not gonna change my opinion no matter how much you try to argue and make an *** out of your self (whiterabbit).

Dave

 
Rep Power: 337

perfect. ill let ed be he judge of whtas best in the end. If anyone has hte last word i want it to be him.

and id be also glad to keep you updated to teh SQ competiton that is comming up in late july. ill be in touch!

 
Rep Power: 347

Oh, wow, thanks for all the input. I have a more powerful amp on the way now. If I have some spare time, I'll build myself another larger box, see how it sounds. Thanks everyone!!

 
Rep Power: 346

Ed, I think that a 5 foot cubic box tuned to 22 hrtz will bang...it might even make your bumper shake lose from the car

BTW, which amp did you go with?

 
Rep Power: 0

I did an install in a RSX a few months back with a single shiva in a 5 cu ft slot ported enclosure tuned to 30hz running off a JL 500/1... That single sub got pretty damn loud in that hatch. Very impressive for the price!

 
Rep Power: 347

I would go with a ported box, but I don't want to giv up that much trunk space.

I got another Ample Audio Amp:

A 218X
- Bridgeable 2 Channel Amplifier
- 90 W RMS x 2 (4 ohm)
- 120W RMS x 2 (2 ohm)
- 250 W RMS x 1 (4 ohm) Bridged
- 180 W x 2 MAX
- Variable Crossover (50-250Hz) Selectable High or Low Pass
- S/N 90dB
- Bass Boost (45Hz) to 12 dB
- MOSFET Power Supply
- THD 0.04%
- 2 RCA Inputs
- 2 RCA Outputs
- 2 High Level Inputs
- 2 ohms Stable
- 11.8" L x 2.2" H x 10" W
- Freq Response10-35,000 Hz


I have their A410 and I really like it. I think the brand Is very good, especially for the price. They're a little unheard of, but way back when i use to browse PureHonda, there was a guy that owned a store and recommended them to me. I wanted to get another one so the amps would match


Ed

 
Rep Power: 346

sounds good