DVC Sub Considerations.
06-24-2005, 01:32 AM
#1
Launching!
Thread Starter
DVC Sub Considerations. The intended sub is an alpine type R 10".
My options are a the 1022D or 1042D models - both are DVC,
1022 = 2 ohm + 2 ohm
1042 = 4 ohm + 4 ohm
The amp intended amp is an alpine mrv-f545
125 x 4 - 4 ohm rms
125 x 2 (4 ohms) + 250 x 2 (2 ohms).
125 x 2 (4 ohms) + 500 X 1 (4 ohms).
Either way, the combined output capability on ch 3 & 4 totals 500w.
The question is, is there any benifit of wiring it up one way over the other. I was thinking of just going with the 1022D and wire it in series.
However, I can just as easily go with the 1042D and wire it in parallel.
With some amps you're better off with a 2 ohm load, but here it seems its the same either way (internally bridged.
-----------------------
Revelation!!!
Just occurred to me. If I go with the 1042D, I won't be able to get the 500W output on ch3/4, just 250 (since its only 1 sub, and the amp can't be run in bridged mode with a 2 ohm load)... So disregard the 1042 question above.
However, with the 1022 (2 + 2), I can wire it up either way and still get the same power, so.........
Is there any reason to wire it up one way over the other?
(Sorry, fried brain at 1:30 in the morning)
My options are a the 1022D or 1042D models - both are DVC,
1022 = 2 ohm + 2 ohm
1042 = 4 ohm + 4 ohm
The amp intended amp is an alpine mrv-f545
125 x 4 - 4 ohm rms
125 x 2 (4 ohms) + 250 x 2 (2 ohms).
125 x 2 (4 ohms) + 500 X 1 (4 ohms).
Either way, the combined output capability on ch 3 & 4 totals 500w.
The question is, is there any benifit of wiring it up one way over the other. I was thinking of just going with the 1022D and wire it in series.
However, I can just as easily go with the 1042D and wire it in parallel.
With some amps you're better off with a 2 ohm load, but here it seems its the same either way (internally bridged.
-----------------------
Revelation!!!
Just occurred to me. If I go with the 1042D, I won't be able to get the 500W output on ch3/4, just 250 (since its only 1 sub, and the amp can't be run in bridged mode with a 2 ohm load)... So disregard the 1042 question above.
However, with the 1022 (2 + 2), I can wire it up either way and still get the same power, so.........
Is there any reason to wire it up one way over the other?
(Sorry, fried brain at 1:30 in the morning)
06-24-2005, 01:41 AM
#2
TECH Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A bridged 4ohm amp has the same electrical resistance as a 2 ohm dual channel. Your best bet will be on channel on each separate coil. Your amp will run cooler and last longer 
06-24-2005, 01:47 AM
#3
Launching!
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by 2MuchRiceMakesMeSick
A bridged 4ohm amp has the same electrical resistance as a 2 ohm dual channel. Your best bet will be on channel on each separate coil. Your amp will run cooler and last longer
I'm confused because either way the numbers add up the same..
Another thing that comes to mind is, if wired individually (each 2 ohm vc to channel), what happens if there is different sound on the L and R channels....
06-24-2005, 02:32 AM
#4
On The Tree
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The State of Jefferson!
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it is a sub, you "Y" adapt the rca's together, then "Y" split them back before the amp. then both channels will recieve the same signal. it is better to not series if possible. not that it is bad, parallel is just the optimum configuration for a few reasons. electrical, sensativity, etc.. 4 ohm mono, 2 ohm stereo will have the same effect. if the signals were out of phase from L to R, the output of the sub will go down. to much out of phase for too long will overheat your voice coils.
