Alright,

so I'm getting close to reinstalling my Ute sound system.
and I can't fkin work out which way I want to install my amps and wire them up.

Here is what i Have.

2 x Focal 27kx subs 4 ohm, Need 300-800W each. (with 800W these can EASILY be overdriven, 800w really not required)
2 x Focal K2P Midbass, Need 100-200W each
2 x Focal 100KP Midrange Need 100W each
2 x Focal TN52 Tweeters 8 Ohm need 50-150W
2 x Focal X/overs (optional)

Amps.
2 x Soundsteam Van Gogh 800.2 (200 x 2, or 800 x 1 each @ 4 ohm)
1 x Soundstream Van Gogh 1600.2 (400 x 2, or 1600 x 1 @ 4 ohm)
1 x Soundstream Van Gogh 500.4 (125 x 4 or 500 x 2 @ 4 ohm)

Note that None of the amps can be run 2 ohm Mono.
I have no wiring capability/neccessity to run 2 ohm stereo.
The system will be run either fully or semi active.

Here is my dilemma, how and which amps to use for what.
System design is No1. Sound Quality, No2. Output.

So here is my options.

TCPO = Total Configured Power Output.

Option 1. - Active/Passive - TCPO 1600W
1 x 1600.2 running Focal 27kx Stereo 400W Each (or bridged 800 x 1 at 8 ohm)
1 x 800.2 running K2p Midranges 200W each
1 x 800.2 Running 100KP Splits with passive X/overs 200 x 2
500.4 spare (doing nothing)

Option 2. - Active/Passive - TCPO 3400W
1 x 800.2 Running 27KX 800W x1
1 x 800.2 Running 27KX 800W x1
1 x 1600.2 Running K2p midbass 400W each
1 x 500.4 Bridged Running 100KP's Passive 500W per Side

Option 3. - Fully Active - TCPO 1575W
1 x 1600.2 Running 2 x 27KX 400W each (or bridged mono 800w x 1 at 8 ohm)
1 x 800.2 Running K2p Midbass 200W each
1 x 500.4 Running 125W into each Midrange, and 125W into each tweeter (actually 62.5 since tweeters are 8 ohm) using Amps supplied 12db X/overs actively.
800.2 Spare (doing nothing)

Option 4. - Fully Active - TCPO 2775W
1 x 800.2 Running Bridged 27kx 800W x 1
1 x 800.2 Running Bridged 27kx 800W x 1
1 x 1600.2 running K2p Midbass 400W x 2
1 x 500.4 Running Actively 125W x 2 into 100kp midbass, 62.5w x 2 into TN52 Tweeters

Option 5. - Active/Passive - TCPO 1800W
1 x 500.4 Bridged running 2 x 27kx at 500W each
1 x 800.2 Running k2p's 200W each
1 x 800.2 Running 100KP splits with passive X/over 200W a side
1600.2 Spare

It's important to note, this is being run off a 8053 head unit,

so I have front mid/tweeter x/over with 5 band eq and separated time alignment,
to use for the mid/tweeter
rear x/over with 5 band eq and separated time alignment for midbass
and sub out separated (stereo or mono) time alignment.

all the x/over points are totally adjustable, with the exception that the 100kp, either run passive or active from the amps x/overs.

Power supply is no issue, running Dual Yellow tops + 20 farad Cap. Lots of 0 gauge!

so .. i'm in a conumdrum.. what do i do.
and don't both replying here, if your going to tell me to buy something else or what i Have isn't right ect.
I want replys based only on what I do have.

Juls

i have voted for option 3. i think it provides the best compromise between performance (fully active front stage), power output, and power consumption. running 2 subs with ~400WRMS on tap for each is ample. also run them as 2xmono rather than bridged (ie: run 1 sub per channel), to avoid wiring the subs in series (and 'back EMF').

if you can fit all the amps into place, consider it, even if that means leaving one unused. in the future you may find a need: ambient tweeters, rears, centre channel, etc. if not, i wouldn't sweat-it.

This is actually what I was considering,
and sell one of the 800.2's
I can't really afford to hang onto it if I'm not using it.

Also I was going to run 2 x 400W, like that, cause it's handy since I don't have to worry about separate gains,
and if the amps are not equal, (even though they would be 2 of the same 800.2's, they could be slightly diff)

the other issue I had, was because it's in a ute, having the subs even 12" apart, creates as much as a 1.0ms delay between them, so I wanted to run them stereo so I could separately time align them,

do you think this is a good idea?

thanks Shiny.
Appreciate your thoughts.
Juls

time aligning L-to-R for the subs (and speakers) will help focus the image for the driver. although aligning the subs probably won't make an audible difference, but good in theory (then again, it may).,

i actually don't align L-to-R, primarily because of my class in competition, it is judged from both front seats, so i can't bias towards one side, and have to tune to cater for both sides. but i do align front-to-back, which helps immensely, esp as my sub is in the boot and probably further away then will be for you.

Yep I totally understand,
I have no plans to go to competition,
my system is for me to enjoy only, my friends don't even need to enjoy it (or even know about it for that matter) I'm not one to go around flashing my system off..

so paramount is it to sound perfect to my proposedly golden ears!

the subs will be at equal places in the vehicle, but due to room constrictions, they would be different distances from me, so time alignment is almost impossible to avoid. There is a big sound difference if I shift my single sub even 1 ft to the left or right, in terms of tightness and loudness, Utes are tricky bastards I can tell you. Had I known I was going to run into such issues, I would have bought a sedan.. all good to think about AFTER the purchase.. haha oh well, still love my car, love my stereos.. the search for nirvana continues.

Thanks again for your help.
Juls

Haha the true sign of knowing you've been on this forum too long - the equipment dictates the car!

I voted option 4... makes sense to use what you've got.. give yourself PLENTY of headroom & a good tune up.. where can you go wrong??

*hands Juls a copy of 'Nevermind' to listen to*

There you go, I had Nirvana sitting on my shelf all along