anybody using this?..got a offer for 2nd at around 1300, one year used. Any 2cent contributors will be highly appreciated.

Do you have an amp?

It's power hungry. You will need at least a REAL amp with 2x150W RMS.

Am currently using MK240, which is the older version. It doesn't perform to its optimum with my current amp. Still sound okay, just not enough.

wow..2 x150W is alot ler.

good comps set. Its one of my choices when getting my comps but i end up with a ETON comps set. Yes it need a powerful amp to fully juice up this comps set. Dont ever think if u got a 100W rms amp to pump it.

sec hand at 1300 is quite ex....brand new <2k

It is a recommended set. Not too bright. Unlike a brand everyone recommends EhemfocalEhem.

Dyn is nice, warm.

Bridge your amp. won't regret.

what about CDT ES??..who will fair better if compare both

No recommended bridge amp to power component...
Bridge amp will make sound lose detail, will waste this good component le...

Try to find a powerfull amp.

hmm.. i have the T4.100, since bridging will loose detail, then play active is that sufficient for this dyn?

Be prepared to splurge on amps. The dyns generally are hard to please. Plenty of headroom is what it usually needs.

u should be looking @ good amps that pumps out 200 rms per channel, suitable amp i can think of is Genesis DMX, TRU B2200 or the older T03-4150

Wah.. no need kwa, such 'expensive' amps.

As far as the Dyns go,
1) Orig passive - 150w x 2 and above...
2) Active - 120w x 4 and above... but 100w x 4 on an amp with plenty of headroom could be just enough
3) Custom passive with impedance correction - 100w x 2 and above...

Tested, been there done that.

micheal... kasi hantam saja... hahaha... but for me la.... i wouldnt wan my amp to pump out less than the stated speaker rms... macam ada physchological barrier... hahaha

Since you have amp liao...
Try 1st, If ngam your feel then no need change liao.

Try VIBE Slick A4 a 4 ch 150W RMS x 4, VIBE is a UK brand, not bad one. Juz a suggestion tho.

Yeah, I am currently hooking up the Dyns with JL 300/2 and AudioSystem 2.150, running on active, with Alpine 9855, and it still doesnt sound right.

The audioshop i went to suggest me changing to the previous model of Tru Technology, T3250, which has power of 250 per channel. So i am wondering should i change or not.

Just a 2 cent thought, be prepared to spend ALOT on amp, to make the Dyns sound like a Dyn.

wht music r u into..or setup?? if sq i think its guud enuff...but prc abit high 1.3k.. if 900 ok lor..

Tru T3250?
3 channel amp?
got such model

maybe u can consider the likes of Zapco Ref, the tru billet series or genesis amp which suits the dyns very well
i am running active on Tru T4.100, 9835

i think he meant t03-2250

this: http://ampguts.realmofexcursion.com/TRU_TO3-2.250/

btw oshann i have a 2 channel billet for sale. let me know if interested

Nice, but I doubt there is any problem with your power right now.

Maybe your install and tuning. I used tonnes of time and advice from friends to figure out the x-over points. And I'm still trying to get the best out of it.

What is your dissatisfaction rite now?

If you're running your Dyns in active mode or any other type of 'huge' 2-way frontal speakers, you do not need to install amps higher than 'true' 50W to 65W rms per channel. My 2 cents opinion here.

i feel that its not performing at where it should

i guess, its because my power cables not adequate.

I am still at 8gauge, on the other hand, my system adds up to be 1100 watt rms already.




=


yeah sorry its Tru T03-2250 hehe..03 series, i think its discontinued already.

but i guess, 150watt rms per channel should be sufficient right? (for the mid drivers only)

---

Added on June 27, 2008, 6:34 pm

serious? 65W rms is enough already?! hmm. i am giving it 150RMS per channel to the mid, and 100RMS per channel to the tweets!

Overkill bro, if your setup is not performing than it's got to be some configuration problem or even hardware problem. You may need to evaluate your whole setup to make sure they all match.

r u serious... to high rms... must be realy hard to tune..

there is one installer that told me i am stressing my amp out. i also not sure man..

i guess, i will go ahead and change the powercable, and review the results!

i will change installer, and ask him to rewire everything

With your current hardware, would presume some configuration problem which I doubt your new installer will wanna touch. He may ask you to replace some 'spoilt' equipments.

You're using 8awg cables, of course you're not putting enough power to the amp itself, thus, not 150W rms to midbass, and 100W rms to tweets.

Change to at least 4awg. There will be alot of difference.

Aren't you contradicting yourself by offering your amp which has lesser output than what you have recommended???

Btw, what car model is this ICE installed to?

Its a Mazda 3~


Yeah i think i gona change straight to 0 Gauge welding cable, any one have any advise on that?
i IMHO think that welding cable is cheap, and serve the same purpose

i have one installer in mind who do a very good job, i gues just have to let him have a couple of other job done, like tuning, and pillar (change) done.

Real 4-gauge audio-spec cables is good enough for most amps unless you're into rediculous competition SPL. Configuration of your power cables are also factors which need to be address here as it's all about getting the 'juice' to your main hardware as efficient/fast as possible which also include re-wiring within the original supply areas from the baattery & alternator.

yawnn........ 4 post... and all 4 towards me. U might be better off giving TS some suggestion.

If u ask me, I think an Audio System F2-300 (2nd hand less than RM1000) will do if budget is the main consideration here. Although severely lack of headroom but as far as I am concern, I think it is adequate. The ball is in your hands and mnkh is right, the more power you feed it, the merrier it is. Since you are prepared to invest in these drivers, why not allocate sufficient resource for the amp to give the speakers a justice.

---

Added on July 3, 2008, 9:14 am

If u ask me, I think an Audio System F2-300 (2nd hand less than RM1000) will do if budget is the main consideration here. Although severely lack of headroom but as far as I am concern, I think it is adequate. The ball is in your hands and mnkh is right, the more power you feed it, the merrier it is. Since you are prepared to invest in these drivers, why not allocate sufficient resource for the amp to give the speakers a justice.

-edited-

It's true, the more W u feed, the better. But, it is more true that the QUALITY of the W u feed. I mean the Tru he offered, has the quality, no doubt.

110w RMS per channel from Tru is nice.

By the way, equipments comprise half the story only. Why not explore other ways like installation and tuning first prior to changing your equipments. You will be surprised the amount of improvement you obtained. Lastly, 2x110w from the Tru Billet (on passive) is no big deal compare to JL300/2 and Audio System F2-300 (on active). Perhaps, not even close. Lastly, the cost of equipments doesn't really signify how good a system should sound. Personally, I have heard many systems that sound better than those who have invested 3 to 4 times more.

Hm, I think in the previous post, we already solved his problem with the Power Cables problem?

And, he did state that, he is not happy with the amps he is currently using. How can you justify, he won't be happy with the Trus just by your own personal judgement?

I guess, bafukie and me is trying to help the person, but well, someone else here is just trying to do not only to help, but to do otherwise to those who's trying to help.

Didn't you just said it is merely personal judgment??? Have I ever mentioned that he will never be happy with the Tru amp?? Lastly, you do not need to insist you are trying to help if that is your true intention and sincere. My friend, it is indeed not too wise to promote your stuffs by contradicting your own stand and belief. Shoot me if you want and this is a free & democratic forum. Everyone is entitled to their opinion as long as they expressed their piece of mind in a civilized manner.

Okay, sorry.

yup yup...hehehe guys relaxs, i found a installer whos willing to do the job for me, as for my tru tech that was offered by the previous installer,

its a TruTech T03.2.250, i heard from other audio gurus, they say the amp is not worth the price tag of 1800sgd.

moreover, they are oso runnin dynaudio, and feeding the mids with 50w of power, and it sounds good. so i guess, installation plays a part.


this installer i am going quite good, no pushing of goods. will be putting my car for him to review, and after that, i will listen and see how good it is! lol

finally, i am going to listen to true dynaudio!

will keep u guys updated with the result ok?

Like I've said earlier, if you're running active for your front Dynaudio, a true 50W rms amp is more than sufficient 'headroom' if setup properly including multiple volume listening pleasure which a passive cannot match. My 2 cents opinion here.

lol... i love this phrase

ARGUING ON THE NET IS LIKE RUNNING IN PARA-OLYMPICS.. EVEN IF U WIN, U R STILL RETARDED...

Don't worry, retards like me are invisible as I've never promoted myself nor any products & any Ice-outlet within my sig in this forums; just some advice to newbies who just started-out base on my actual personal independant experience in car audio, home hi-fi & home theatre.

moby... its not directed to u nor to anyone specific...

I feel u Jack!

Much appreciated but it's quite common in open forum discussion which is totally healthy.

erm... so ts...bought ths stuff??

Hi Guys.

I fixed my car already.

The few items I've done:
Redo APillar
Door Panel (with the drivers facing out rather than hiding behind the door)
Changed my power cable, to monster 0 gauge
Added a H701 processor
Redo my sound proofing
Tuning


The result, its a drastic change, now the music seems fuller, clearer, and the problem I have faced is solved. I think its because of the improper installation from the previous installer, and the power cables (didnt put too much focus on the cables initially).

So, everything is good now ;]
the staging and imaging is still not that perfect yet, coz i think my installer rush thru many sleepless nites to get it done (i no car use haha..) so, need to listen to the system first, for a few weeks, before i can whine to him, to arrange it to my liking.

I conclude with this, a good system, equipments, requires good installation, and the person's effort to make them perform the equipment's potential!

thanks everyone for the many advises!

monster 0g...wow...

i've personally used the MK240 and also MK362 3way

here's my experience:

MK240 setup was running initially on passives. the MD100 tweeters started off on the harsh side
mid bass wasn't pounding.....probably in sufficient power as its 84db response....alot lower compared to the rest of the speakers
then i was running active.....sounded alot better as the original passives were sucky...
found the speakers too warm for liking esp pairing with Genesis Dual Monos....yup i'm one of those who got the Genesis DM & DMX....
was whacking the dyns upside down...but like i said...slightly too warm for my liking....

next upgraded was MK362 which came with a 3" mids and 1.5" MD102 which based on the legendary MD130 ESOTEC
the new passives were great....no complains....the tweeters is not harsh at all

one of my friends is running full McIntosh HU and amps with the ESOTAR and MW160...very impressive

my conclusion with dynaudio after two sets:
1. they r power hungry and the more power u feed....it gets nicer
2. they need about 200 hours to properly run in...which means u need to run it like 1 month for 24hours

my personal experience with car speakers in order of numbers:
1. Alpine SPX-177 (2002)
2. Dynaudio MK 240 (2005)
3. Dynaudio MW160 with North Creek tweeters (2005)
4. Scanspeaks Revelator 7" mids with North Creek tweeters (2006)
5. Scanspeaks Revelator 7" & Ring Radiator tweeters (2006)
6. Dynaudio MK 362 (2007)
7. PHD AF 6.1 Kit Pro (current)