Boss REV-3000D Chaos Amplifier

Ummm...  I will cut to the chase, and you can read the rest if you want to...  Buy it, but to do not believe everything you read.  Seems to be a good value, or "bang for the buck" as you put it, if you take the written specs with a grain of salt.  Now...  where do I start?  I was looking up a few reviews on the 'net, and I cannot believe that some of these people even have computers.  It also says quite a bit for the public school systems...  Here is the skinny.  It appears to be a digital amp, good...  That means they cannot skew the test results TOO much.  Boss always tends to WAY overrate their products, you simply cannot get 600 watts X2 out of an amp that only has two 30 amp fuses in it (600x2=1200, but 30*2*14.4*.5=432 and 1200>432), so I was a bit leary when I heard Boss had a class D amp...  However, digital amps are a different breed altogether, with efficiencies approaching 95%.  I will explain:  In an analog amp, the kind we are all used to, modern topologies approach, but never reach 50%.  A more conservative rating would be closer in the 35-40 percent range.  This is due to the way a transistor tracks the analog signal, as it is never fully on or fully off, therefor it must be standing off at least some of the power supply's high voltage.  When you listen to the amp at lower volumes, the efficiency becomes abysmal, typically 20-25 percent.  What that means is that of all of the power going into an amp, only 20-50% comes out as the power you want it to be...  the rest is HEAT.  Example from above:  two 30 amp fuses equals 60 amps total current draw, 14.4 is the nominal voltage of a car's electrical system while the car is RUNNING, (13.2 while not running), and .5 is the decimal equivalent of 50%, now power equals voltage times current, right?  So: {{{30amps*2fuses}*14.4volts}*50%}  60*14.4*.5=432, and that is the TOTAL output power, now you have to divide that by two to give you the continuous output power PER CHANNEL - 216 watts - a far cry from the advertised 600, eh?  And do not forget about the 432 watts blowing off that heatsink!  These numbers only get worse as you lower the load impedance, as there is more current flowing through the individual junctions of the transistors.  That is why an amp will run hotter when you put too much of a load on it.  OK, now in digital amps, the output is based on a phenomenon called "duty cycle".  If you take a battery and place it across the terminals of a woofer, the cone will move one way, and if you switch the terminals, the cone will move the other way, right?  If you repeat this back and forth motion quickly enough, say 30,000 times a second (referred to as the sampling or switching frequency - higher is better, nay, REQUIRED for high frequencies, lower is better for low frequencies), but the terminals are connected exactly the same length of time for each polarity, that is a "duty cycle" of 50%, and the cone will not move.  If you can do that fast enough, the cone and voice coil cannot move in and out that fast can they?  But if you take the battery and hold it one way for 10 milliseconds, and then the other way for 20 milliseconds, you have a duty cycle of 66% in the direction of the 20ms, and there will be a slight movement in the 20ms direction.  The more of these 66% duty cycles you have in sequence, the further the cone will move out (or in) Repeat, with varying duty cycles.  That is how a digital amp works.  Because the transistors are ALWAYS either fully on or fully off, they do not exhibit the voltage drop across them, and therefore do not heat up nearly as much.  Most digital amps on the market today can reach 90% efficiency or more.  The Boss amp has three 30 amp fuses in it.  Plugging in to the above formula, we get 90*14.4*.90=1166.4watts, pretty close to the advertised 1200 watts RMS into 4 ohms, but I would be a little leary about the 2200 watts claimed at 2 ohms, and VERY skeptical about the 3000 watts they claim at 1 ohm.  Ohm's law cannot be broken...  I hope this has helped.

In my opinion I would never buy anything made by boss.

In my opinion Anything

In my opinion Anything made by

In my opinion Anything made by boss is really

In my opinion Anything made by boss is really not that

In my opinion Anything made by boss is really not that good.

If your looking to spend around $350 to 400 bucks, you could go to sounddomain and get either the Lighting audio Storm serier 1000.1D. It's on sale there for about $339.99. You can also get an MTX Thunder 81000D for $399.99. Take your pic, both of these amps are very well built and can give you a good amount of clean power to run those 10's. around 1000-1500 watts.

Here is the link to those amp prices

https://www.sounddomain.com/sku/MTX81000D MTX amp

https://www.sounddomain.com/sku/LITS11000DCOMBO Lighting Audio

That 1500 x 1 is at 2ohms and that is RMS power. MTX doesn't recommend running the amp lower than 2 ohms. The only problem I have with this amp is that it doesn't come with a subsonic filter( which is very useful for any subwoofer system that is going to be ported).

so out of the 2 u suggested, what one would be better??  I plan on building a ported box, and getting the DVC 2ohms each coil, (so i will hook them up in series to get 4ohms (each) then parell the two to get 2ohms) so i will need something that is 2 ohm stable.

Thanks

Right now I'm using the Lighting Storm amp. I'm running it at 1ohm to power my 15 L5(DVC 4ohm ). I have the sub wired parallel to to get 2ohm that way when it I bridge the amp, it will see a 1ohm load. This amp is stable at the load. If you could get a line driver or crossover with a subsonic filter then I would go with the MTX because of the amount of power that you'll get at 2ohm, but since your gonna go with a ported design, then I would go with the Lighting Audio.

I plan on building a ported box, and getting the DVC 2ohms each coil, (so i will hook them up in series to get 4ohms (each) then parell the two to get 2ohms) so i will need something that is 2 ohm stable.

No, you would want an amp that's 1ohm stable if you plan on bridging the amp else if your plan is to run the subs in stereo mode(using all the amp's channels) then you could go with just a 2 ohm stable amp. But the choice is really up to you.

ok, please correct me if i am wrong, but if i have a total of 2 ohm load (my subs) when i hook it up to the amp (lets say the MTX)(Mono amp) wouldent it still be a 2 ohm load on the amp? 

Yes and no. Even though the amp says 1 channel for digital mono amp, it's still a two channel amp(i.e...meaning that you will have two + and two - channel). The reason for this is for the simple fact that if you have a DVC sub you can easily run it in stereo mode verses mono. So in order to use only one channel of this amp, your gonna have to bridge it. Now when you bridge an amp, it will act as if its getting half of the actual ohm load that you present it with. So if you have a 4ohm load, when you bridge the amp it will act as if its 2ohm instead of the actual 4, resulting in more power. Now if you run the load at 2ohm, then with the amp in its bridged state will act as if the load is at 1ohm instead of 2ohm. The reason why I went against the is because MTX states that this amp is only stable at 2ohm nothing lower, but the Lighting audio is stable down to 1ohm. 

The answer to that question it both yes and no. Even though the amp says 1 channel for digital mono amp, it's still a two channel amp(i.e...meaning that you will have two + and two - channel). The reason for this is for the simple fact that if you have a DVC sub you can easily run it in stereo mode verses mono. So in order to use only one channel of this amp, your gonna have to bridge it.

YES: 
If you use all the channels of the amp (both + and - channels)in a stereo configuration then yes the amp will see the sub's 2ohm load as a 2ohm load.

NO:
Now when you bridge an amp, it will act as if its getting half of the actual ohm load that you present it with. So if you have a 4ohm load, when you bridge the amp it will act as if its 2ohm instead of the actual 4, resulting in more power. Now if you run the load at 2ohm, then with the amp in its bridged state will act as if the load is at 1ohm instead of 2ohm.

The reason why I went against the is because MTX states that this amp is only stable at 2ohm nothing lower, but the Lighting audio is stable down to 1ohm. 

I hope I cleared it up for you.

Hey guys.  Not trying to get into the argument.  I checked out the users manual. 

cerwinvega19 - if you already have the speakers and dont want to spend extra $$ - MAKE SURE the MTX will work with your existing set up.  The MTX speaker terminal configuration is unconventional for a mono amp (for me) which I think is what caused the previous debate.  Ive only worked with mono amps with one set of terminals. 

Let's see If I have this right on the non-bridgeable MTX...in order to achieve doubled power (2ohms) you will need for example - two SVC subs at 2ohms each per channel, one DVC sub at 2ohms per coil per channel, or four SVC subs at 4ohms per coil wiring in series for 2 subs per channel.  Check the manual. 

Also, go with 12's.  Better bang for the buck.  If space is the issue, find subs for compact sealed applications.  Plenty out there.  Nother opinion.....