DDM3 Protest Results

yes i remeber that too, lol.

charlesestes wrote:

i dont think it wouldve passed at 30%. the test was done at 13.8v not 14.4 like the others. .6vs will make more power and it was only passing by 4ws as it was. you guys keep talking about people getting stuck with paperweights, move up a class if your amps does to much power or stop buying amps that ride the line so closely. like the old saying goes,"if you play with fire, your bound to get burned!" everyone is constantly crying about this or that, these rules are the same as they've always been. they havent changed. deal with them or stfu and go somewhere else!build your car, put it in the lanes, and hold your head up, win lose or draw! crying about someones amp isnt going to help you win, it just makes you sund like a little "Female dog"!

Being ignorant like this is doing nothing to help. You gonna like it if your pd2000 doesn't pass within 20% now? You say people are "riding the line". I'll tell you that I did not lead my customers to an amp that rode the line. I was told the amp was legit and given proof of the amps output as well. I'm not trying to start a war with you Charles but to tell people to "deal with the rules or stfu" is rediculous. You are a veteran competitor... and a good one at that. Your energy would be better spent helping find a solution than telling people to stfu. I urge everyone to contact committee member and offer constructive suggestions. Something good can come of this.

I posted under gabes topic on this.

Wow one of the things said in there was pretty interesting....NOw in this case the manufacturer rating is 770 its in a manual????? Ohhhhhhhhh Lawd well then everyone knew this was gonna happen.... And it is the higher rating ... Usaci states goes with the higher of the two... So this amp is 770 PERIOD.


lol, i just pulled out my user manual and it reads 770 @ 4 ohm, 1900 @ 1 ohm 12v, 2600 @ 1 ohm 14.4v, 3000 @ 1 ohm 16.0v.

so many differing ratings

Yep.

I actually did a little research when I heard that the amp was being protested. This being one of the items I found.

There is one other topic as well, but that one proves enough I think.

Maybe no amp should be deemed legit in a class UNTIL USACI certifies it....then if someone buys an amp that is not usaci certified... they did it knowing there was a chance they could be wasting there money. In other word encourage the manufacturer to either provide acceptable proof that the amp does what they say, or send one in to get verified. Either way, once the amp gets USACI approval it's set in stone and no one buying a certified amp would end up wasting there money.

so being told by dd that the amp does 775w isnt riding the line when its only allowd 780w? my pd2000.1s were rerated higher and guess what chris, i moved up in class. no crying involved. buy your equipment and run it. if you know an amps is on the line of possibly not passing, then buy a different amp or deal with the consequenses.there was no ignorance in my statement. being ignorant is not knowing or being rude, i was neither. i knew that amp would be very close to not passing and guess what, it was right there. i stated my opinion, if you dont like it, oh well ignore it. the solution is there already, deal with the rules! thats what they are there for. every year we have to change to accomodate someone and im tired of it. i didnt see you on here when kickers got rerated, oh yeah you dont push kicker. like you said, im not looking to go to war with anyone, but I WILL STATE MY OPINIONS JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE! you only see negativity because im on the opposing side of the issue. i did say we should kep the 30% if you read other posts.

bumpin s-10 wrote:

Maybe no amp should be deemed legit in a class UNTIL USACI certifies it....then if someone buys an amp that is not usaci certified... they did it knowing there was a chance they could be wasting there money. In other word encourage the manufacturer to either provide acceptable proof that the amp does what they say, or send one in to get verified. Either way, once the amp gets USACI approval it's set in stone and no one buying a certified amp would end up wasting there money.

Isn't the CEA standard in which the industry has moved too enough? Or did my post that truely explained the standard make it believe that manufactures still have to room to curve the results?

YOu ain't the first person i heard the CEA thing from Gabe. Deffinaly makes you think about it

I was never told the amp would do 775watts where did that come from??? Also I thought the Kicker amp being rerated was bull as well. I mean cmon' the 1200 was definately not the strongest amp in it's class. If you read my posts...i am against people wasting there money when they are trusting there amps to be legit and am looking for a solution, that is all. Read my reply above about USACI certified amps.

But in the reading of the guy having a manual saying 770 @ 4ohm ummmmmmmm that amp shouldnt have been in 0-600 to start with.... And everyone that bought one brand new in the box got that freaking rating in the manual and was probly like OHHHHHHHHH LAWD better throw that away..... AM I RIGHT?????? I WANT ANSWERS, CAUSE THAT IS SOME SHADY SHIT RIGHT THERE...

WHO IS A DEALER DOES THE fornicating MANUAL SAY THIS??????????? IM PISSSSSSSED

you said dd showed you test results so im assuming that they were the same results they showed others and those results showed 775w@4ohms. now i know your a very intelligent person when it comes to 12v electronics chris so here is the question. how many amps in production will do the exact same power from the same production line? not many is the answer. there are always stronger and weaker amps so the test result will differ everytime. if an amp is that close to tolerance then you know its a gamble to buy 1. all it takes is for the testing to be done with an amp a little stronger than the 1 tested before and 5w aint much fudge factor.people know what they are buying, playing stupid about it is the only ignorant thing going on here.

I agree with one thing Charles and others have said...if it was 30% in the past it should remain 30%....the possible consiquences of testing all the other amps that where allowed 30% could be terrible. I mean a lot of people have bought certain amps TRUSTING USACI when they say an amp has passed. If some of those amps wouldn't pass at 20% are they prepared for the fallout from that??? Much simpler to keep it as it was. I also think maybe USACI should look into the real world testing at the bottom of the results sheet. I think it was 13.8volts on an inductive load. That's real world power...what we use.

mr. samsel is a dealer, but i bet his amps didnt come with manuals, lol.

all prior testing was done at 14.4 and your m3 wont pass there so why should we change to 13.8 now? maybe because then your m3 would pass? it may still pass 14.4, who knows, but why should we change the voltage and not teh percentage?

dam i better re rate quad amps from 1watt to 2watts

wow if its in the spec at 700+ then wow lookout
but i also thoght that usaci rated by the lowest ohm rateing?

This goes beyond the M3... I don't run and never have ran the M3. It's the fact that yet another group of consumers may get f**ckEd... Period!!! What can be done to prevent it from happening again?

Chris, Are you a dealer? Can you inlighten me on this manual issue... Im in no way pointing at anyone or anything. But if a Manuel says this then..... fornicate the compeditors that own these amps and saw this manual...... The ones that didn't get it new in the box well .. They are doing what was best for them at the time.... But the ones that knew this .... F U C K THEM. AND fornicate THIS SPORT.

charlesestes wrote:

all prior testing was done at 14.4 and your m3 wont pass there so why should we change to 13.8 now? maybe because then your m3 would pass? it may still pass 14.4, who knows, but why should we change the voltage and not teh percentage?

This is not about me dammit...I don't run the damn amp! I was just thinking out loud for a posible change that may make sense in the future I dunno...if the damn M3 doesn't pass it don't pass. I just don't want people getting ripped off anymore that is all! Do you understand now? I don't care that it's the M3, it could be the pd2000 or whatever.

quad box wrote:

dam i better re rate quad amps from 1watt to 2watts

wow if its in the spec at 700+ then wow lookout
but i also thoght that usaci rated by the lowest ohm rateing?

N ope they go with the higher of the two...


Now chris your my boy so dont take this wrong... I say fornicate the customers consumers what ever you want to call them if they opened a box and put in an amp that MANUAL SAID 770 @ 4 OHM...Then it is there own cheatin asss illiterate stered wrong bye salesmans asss motherfuckers.

I will get comment from Steve at DD on the manual issue...I know the deal but some a holes on here prob wouldn't believe me if I explained... they'd probably think I'm biased or something.

i know you dont chris, but you do sell them. so what about the owners manuals? people put themselves in this situation every year trying to get the next hot amp.its been going on for years and years and will continue until people learn to rely on their build and not which amps slide under the radar for finls that year. ignorance is no excuse, you know what your buying when you specifically buy an amp for a power rated class. your customer that bought these for daily use will not come in crying because usaci rearated their amps, only the die hard competitors that tried a gamble and lost will be boo hooing about this. let themretest the amps at 14.4 w a 30% tolerance and see what happens. they alraedy have the amp so it shouldnt be that big of a deal.

Fact is in less than a month I won't even be a damn stereo shop anymore...no money in this crap... Tint and Detailing is where the money is at for us so if people think I'm upset because I "push" Digital designs they are wrong....I mean look at what team I'm on for god's sake....Team Revolution. I haven't sold a DD amp in 4 months.

Since I got Jimbo in an uproar over the manual. here is a bench test done by someone else. look at the reactive and final loads, then look at the power. Hmmm

http://forum.soundpressure.com/showthread.php?t=4373

Takes a little research to find out if it would be smart to buy an amp for a specific class. I am in no way bashing on DD or any manufacture, just stating what I have found during the time of protest, or thought of protest.

same as ma explained the hk3000d with a 680w rating in the owners manual,"it was a typo or misprint" and ralph said ok and i never got my manual back. it magically disappeared at finals and noone could ever seem to find 1 again.so you know what i did, i went out and got some cause usaci said they were legal for that class!

this goes along with what the soundpressure site says, the dd euro site, i guess dd never let them know to change the paragraph below the ratings or they copied and pasted before dd changed there usa site, but

i myself remember when it was rated 2700 on dd's site, then a week later it was 2400, but the paragraph below talking about the m3 they had forgot to change the 2700 to 2400 but that too was fixed a few days later, looks like they didnt make the second change on the euro site

here is the dd euro site
http://www.ddaudio.eu/DDMamps.asp

so if you ask me, dd knowingly changed the rating to accoodate someones request, probably a customer, but maybe they just put down the wrong info to start with

No chris not SAYING YOU AT ALL BRO. But when you hear on the Manual thing will you please let me know..... Your my boy and in no way am i pointing or blaming you .... I dont think Charles is either he is just saying kinda what i did about the open a box throw the manualt to the side and still use it knowing what it said...


As a Retailer i dont carrry not one Brand that doesn't have owners manuals in there boxes... And i can name a few heavyhitter amps that mysterically dont use Manuals... So that has always brought a red flag up .... Why would a Manufacturer not put manuals in boxes... Hell i know why Atomic didn't so it makes me think the others dont for the same reason.

charlesestes wrote:

i know you dont chris, but you do sell them. so what about the owners manuals? people put themselves in this situation every year trying to get the next hot amp.its been going on for years and years and will continue until people learn to rely on their build and not which amps slide under the radar for finls that year. ignorance is no excuse, you know what your buying when you specifically buy an amp for a power rated class. your customer that bought these for daily use will not come in crying because usaci rearated their amps, only the die hard competitors that tried a gamble and lost will be boo hooing about this. let themretest the amps at 14.4 w a 30% tolerance and see what happens. they alraedy have the amp so it shouldnt be that big of a deal.

I agree..."every year trying to get the next hot amp.its been going on for years and years" It's almost as though the rules encourage that behavior...that's what needs to change. I mean you could have identical "perfect" builds and the stronger amp will win...always. Maybe the answer is to come up with a USACI approve amp list for all classes. And if a competitor choses to run an amp not on the list then they are putting themselves in that situation. What ya think?

my point is chris taht you've never been vocal before about any other amps being rerated, but you say you dont care that its a dd. obviously you do somewhat cause its got your panties all in a wad,lol. honestly, im just bored and love to instigate shit. it relaxes me. lol

i dont really care honestly. ill take what they offer and get in where i fit in. its all competition and thats what i love.