[speedzak]

We can only imagine how it would've been without your wife's consent. Now, I can see that wide grin even after going thru all this.
Lucky you!

[kb100]

Congratulations Hydra!

Cant wait to audition it!

[s0uljah]

Ahh finally the pics came. Looking simple and Im sure it sounds exquisite

Originally Posted by noidaboy

So are we gonna have the 9887 upgraded as well?

In for the WIN!!

Claiming first spot in the event that the 9887 goes on sale

[jkdas]

Originally Posted by s0uljah

Ahh finally the pics came. Looking simple and Im sure it sounds exquisite



In for the WIN!!

Claiming first spot in the event that the 9887 goes on sale

Can we have a 'bet' section at TBHP.

It should soon be on sale:

[hydrashok]

Thank you, noidaboy, KB100 & s0u1jah!

@Zak, yep, the grin is very much plastered on my face

@s0uljah & JK, you BAD boys, not any time soon. NOT any time soon. An acute Vitamin-M deficiency takes care of all decisions now

[gunbir]

Originally Posted by jkdas

Can we have a 'bet' section at TBHP.

I want in on that action! I say within the next 60 days

[Bass&Trouble]

Originally Posted by hydrashok

But yes, I am thinking what 500wRMS from the S500 sounds like, if 200wRMS from the S44 sounds like this.

Can someone shed some light on what exactly would be the difference between the 200 W rms of a Tru Steel Amp, and say, 200 W rms of an Audison SRx amp?

[gunbir]

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

Can someone shed some light on what exactly would be the difference between the 200 W rms of a Tru Steel Amp, and say, 200 W rms of an Audison SRx amp?

Somewhat akin to the difference between 200hp from an American big block V8 and 200hp from a Japanese engine...

[low_bass_makker]

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

Can someone shed some light on what exactly would be the difference between the 200 W rms of a Tru Steel Amp, and say, 200 W rms of an Audison SRx amp?

Ajay Bhai I think it is LRx 350 Watts not the SRx.

[redfire]

Hey Hydra, congrats. Did you come here (TVM) yesterday? If yes you did a big offense by not calling me. The amp looks more 'metallic' and 'industrial' (I like that). Enjoy

[hydrashok]

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

Can someone shed some light on what exactly would be the difference between the 200 W rms of a Tru Steel Amp, and say, 200 W rms of an Audison SRx amp?

To further clarify, the same sub (IDQ12 d2v2) sounded substantially different when used with the Audison LRx rated at 350wRMS and with the TRU Steel S44 rated at 200w RMS (both at 4 ohm). Same sub, same box, same car, same music, same HU. By 'substantially different', I mean the music sounded a lot better with the TRU amp.

I won't be able to give you a more 'technical' explanation, sorry.

@redfire, thank you! I do like the more industrial look too. I've always been a sucker for the Aluminum finish.

I wasn't able to come to TVM y'day. I'd definitely have called you if I did

[jkdas]

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

Can someone shed some light on what exactly would be the difference between the 200 W rms of a Tru Steel Amp, and say, 200 W rms of an Audison SRx amp?

Originally Posted by gunbir

Somewhat akin to the difference between 200hp from an American big block V8 and 200hp from a Japanese engine...

Excellent reply. Which is which? Tru the jap then right?

[Bass&Trouble]

Originally Posted by low_bass_makker

Ajay Bhai I think it is LRx 350 Watts not the SRx.

Originally Posted by hydrashok

To further clarify, the same sub (IDQ12 d2v2) sounded substantially different when used with the Audison LRx rated at 350wRMS and with the TRU Steel S44 rated at 200w RMS (both at 4 ohm). Same sub, same box, same car, same music, same HU. By 'substantially different', I mean the music sounded a lot better with the TRU amp.

I won't be able to give you a more 'technical' explanation, sorry.

It suffices for you to say "it sounds better". Why that would be the case is completely beyond me. I would probably understand if it made a noticeable in the full range band. But just in the sub, with nearly half the power.. beats me.

Originally Posted by jkdas

Tru the jap then right?

[Magma]

irony
i thought the TRU is a US product/company!

hydra proabably finds the music "better" because he is also hearing the compos on the same amp.
so all in all the "full range band" that Ajay is talking about is probably in play.

Unfair to judge how just the sub is responding if you change the amp for the compos at the same time too.
(in my noob opinion IMNO)

[hydrashok]

Originally Posted by gunbir

I want in on that action! I say within the next 60 days

Too short-term. You'll lose your money if you put any on this . You guys have no faith in my resolve, *sob, sob*

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

...I would probably understand if it made a noticeable in the full range band. But just in the sub, with nearly half the power.. beats me.

It did make a positive difference in the components too. Maybe I did not stress this enough in my review-wallah post. I mentioned the improvement in response in the sub specifically, as I was quite concerned that I would get lesser performance from the sub vis-a-vis the LRx, before the install was completed (I was positive the comps would sound better). As for the why, I think that the TRU is simply the better amp. I guess it is a bit underrated, and maybe it gives a steadier & more stable power flow to the sub (at 4 ohm load, and at real-world battery voltage).