AudioCircle
Other Stuff => Archived Circles => Hypex Owners Circle => Topic started by: Emile on 25 Sep 2012, 09:02 am
-
Listening, be it biased or unbiased aside, why would the nc1200's sound better then the NC400's.
Prequel: I own a pair of Spectron amps, there's no question, they are in a different league when bridged in my system.
I got the following from the Hypex datasheets, tried to match as best as possible but typical/maximal values are not all supplied, for power the NC400 has typical values and NC1200 minimal values for example, anyway:
NC400:
Rated output power (typical): 200/400/580
THD+N (max): 0.002%
Output noise: 23uV
SNR: 125 dB
Zout (max): 1mOHM
Current limit: 24A
Power supply voltage: 64V
NC1200:
Rated output power (minimal): 400/700/1200
THD+N (max): 0.004%
Output noise: 20uV
SNR: 128 dB
Zout (max): 2mOHM
Current limit: 38A
Power supply voltage: 84V
So separately from the powerratings the NC400 should have half the output resistance/double damping factor and half the THD+N but the NC1200 3uV less output noise and a 3 dB better SNR. Enough for the differences in "sonic performance"? I'd be enclined to say no. However supplied powerratings are quite different:
8 Ohms: 200W(typ) vs 400W(min)
4 Ohms: 400W(typ) vs 700W(min)
2 Ohms: 580W(typ) vs 1200W(min)
Voltage (times 93% efficiency): 59.52V vs 78,12V
Current: 24A vs 38A
V*A: 1428,48W vs 2968,56W
Now suppose we replace the NC400 with a bridged pair, we should get:
8 Ohms: 800W vs 400W
4 Ohms: 1160W vs 700W
2 Ohms: between 1160 and maybe 1682W (? no 1 Ohm rating supplied) vs 1200W
Voltage: 119,04V vs 78,12V
Current: 24A vs 38A
V*A: 2856,96W vs 2968,56W
Zout should double so this would then be equal, edit: probably higher because of additional resistance from a piece of wire needed for bridging.
Probably more noise generated from double smps/double ncore, but also noise cancellation from driving speakers balanced(bridged) which potentially may be a big benefit.
I'd say a comparison between bridged NC400's and single NC1200's is in order in both normal and low impedance speakers since I can clearly see the NC1200's outperforming single NC400's per Spectron example.
-
You lost me with your last remark:
"I can clearly see the NC1200's outperforming single NC400's per Spectron example."
After your earlier state:
"Enough for the differences in "sonic performance"? I'd be enclined to say no."
-
Ditto what Cab said :?
-
thats suggesting the "but the NC1200 3uV less output noise and a 3 dB better SNR" bit would not be the main reason for it sounding "much" better then the NC400. I am suggesting the increase in power is responsible. And then what would happen if you bridge NC400's..
-
Assuming that both amplifiers are operated without clipping the output, perhaps the difference in sonic performance that is being observed does not lie the the specifications alone. These are, after all two different amplifiers, it is illogical to expect them to sound exactly the same.
Scotty
-
Apparently Mgalusha has measured several nc400's and they are actually 240 watts at 8 ohms so your numbers are low,probably for both amps.
-
I was told the following by Hypex when asked about the difference in sound being reported:
"When you use the NC1200 with our SMPS1200 and the NC400 with the SMPS600 there should not be a big difference.
What you need to know is that most OEM customers that use the NC1200 now use there own power supply."
-
NC400/SMPS600 minimum impedance rating 2 Ohms.
Is the following true or false?
Two SMPS600 driving two NC400 bridged = minimum impedance rating 2 Ohms
One SMPS600 driving two NC400 bridged = minimum impedance rating 4 Ohms
I changed my speaker load from series (10.6 Ohm minimum, about 125W) to parallel (2.65 Ohm minimum, about 500W). So far I changed only the center channel, and await new speaker wire to change the L/R. Even with only the center channel changed, clean output levels remind me of AudioKinesis.
Dynaudio drivers benefit by huge current/voltage reserves. I wonder if performance would audibly improve with even more current and voltage.
-
The 2 Ncore1200 based amplifiers that I'm aware of (available now, here in the States) are the Atsah and Merrill Veritas monoblocks which both use a SMPS1200 per NC1200. Both use the version with built in input buffers rather than implement their own buffers.
-
Can someone please clear up the NC400 and NC1200 input differences. The NC400 (which I have) is complete, does the NC1200 require an OEM-supplied input stage? If not, why all the talk of it? If so, what are the various options?
Thanks.
-
Can someone please clear up the NC400 and NC1200 input differences. The NC400 (which I have) is complete, does the NC1200 require an OEM-supplied input stage? If not, why all the talk of it? If so, what are the various options?
Thanks.
I'm not an authority, but I believe that the NC400 input stage is integrated into the board and it would be difficult to implement a custom one, but that the NC1200 is somewhat modular in design and a custom input stage can more easily be implemented.
-
Regnad, The design and the parts used in the input stage determine to a large degree what you hear from an amplifier. The NC 1200 as an OEM piece has the option to to be built with a custom input stage designed by the mfgr. or it can be used with a Hypex designed input stage that is specific to the NC 1200.
Scotty
-
post 341:
Bruno-
"Since not every new reader has the patience to read the whole thread, let me recap the overall plan for Ncore. UcD is already rather good and certainly adequate for practically any application. It would make no sense to rush out and flood the market with Ncore. So we're reserving Ncore for high end companies prepared to give it the profile it deserves. The NC1200 is the platform for that, so it isn't sold freely. I'm saying platform because we're offering customization. One of class D's problems in the high-end market has been the perception that it's just the same module in different boxes. We'll make sure one company's NC1200 won't be the same as another's (although of course measured performance will be the same).
For the DIY market there will be an über-tweaked version called NC400. "
How does the performance of the NC1200 compare to the NC400?
Bruno-
"All the info you need is in the data sheets. The NC400 has somewhat lower distortion & output impedance than the NC1200 and it's got de luxe discrete input buffers. Otherwise the NC1200 has about 40% more voltage and current reserve and that's pretty much all. " - post 2325
that diy thread has everything you could possibly want and more if you guys truly want to know all. Take the time to read it.
-
And yet every single review of a NC1200 based amp is reporting better performance than the NC400
Perhaps it something other than distortion?
For example, it would be interesting to see phase response on the two amps.
A square wave test would be useful as well.
-
And yet every single review of a NC1200 based amp is reporting better performance than the NC400
Perhaps it something other than distortion?
For example, it would be interesting to see phase response on the two amps.
A square wave test would be useful as well.
Maybe the significance of simply having more headroom overrides the theoretical superiority of the 400 suggested by its distortion figures.
-
Maybe the significance of simply having more headroom overrides the theoretical superiority of the 400 suggested by its distortion figures.
Exactly, but if this is the case a bridged pair of NC400's should sound even better then a single NC1200, atleast into a 4-8 ohm load and assuming 24A is a sufficient current limit, which it should be..
Apart from this, look at the 138dB supplied for an NC1200 with no input buffer, thats awesome really, I cant remember ever even having seen a buffer stage that can match that figure irl.
-
Exactly, but if this is the case a bridged pair of NC400's should sound even better then a single NC1200, atleast into a 4-8 ohm load and assuming 24A is a sufficient current limit, which it should be..
Apart from this, look at the 138dB supplied for an NC1200 with no input buffer, thats awesome really, I cant remember ever even having seen a buffer stage that can match that figure irl.
Emile, bridging itself--first, as an added circuit and, second, as a way to connecting together parts that, in the first place, were not designed to work optimally in that manner (basically, only as separate channels)--is a compromised step backwards in hi-end audio design. Amp bridging usage is mostly for PA sytems and car audio. In car audio, it is a mandatory way to generate more voltage given the 12.6 volt (full charge) limitation of a car battery. It is also used as a way of getting more "stereo" power by non-critical Home Theater users--using idle channels out of a bridging enabled multichanel receiver/ampifier.
But as far as I am concerned, with a few notable exceptions (come to mind the late Richard Brown's legendary and uber-scarce BEL1001 Mark V, whose extraordinary stereo SQ performance actually improved in bridged mono), no respectable audio designer out there will use bridging as the best way of generating more headroom and maintain or, more importantly, improve overall sound quality accross the board. If the main problem with your speakers/system is headroom, then, in your particular situation, bridging identically quality amps will be most likely an economically way to improve your particular system...but generalizing and proclaming that " a bridged pair of NC400s should sound even better than a single NC1200" is quite a stretch--possible, in the realm of wishful thinking, yes...but, an obvios logical conclusion in the realm of science, not necesarlily. Of course, you may be totally right and the NC400s could end up joining the BEL1001 Mark V as one more of those few notable exceptions...to Bruno's surprise, unless he already knows that but is hidding it to protect the marketing of his own Mola-Mola and other OEM NC1200 creations.
munosmario
-
And yet every single review of a NC1200 based amp is reporting better performance than the NC400
Perhaps it something other than distortion?
For example, it would be interesting to see phase response on the two amps.
There's another factor that can (for most humans, always does) influence one's perception of sound quality and that is bias and expectation. I am not saying that explains this reported difference between NC400 and NC1200 but it certainly is in play and could contribute to the degree of difference people think they hear. We know this because that bias is absolutely there since it is a human being's brain doing the subjective listening. Not one of us should think we are necessarily reliable observers of comparative sound quality differences, although most of us do.
So if I had an opportunity to listen to both, I'd make sure someone helped out so that I didn't know which was playing over many listening sessions while I take notes and record my preferences, and confirm that despite Bruno's suggestion to the contrary, there is a marked difference in sound quality between these two amps with most or all people happening to prefer the sound of the NC1200.
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself--and you are the easiest person to fool."
-Richard Feynman
I know that many of you are shaking your head at this line of thinking because you know that you hear what you hear and that you personally would not let your biases influence your perceptions. To head off any flames, let me reiterate that I am not saying that I think that listener bias is the reason for the sound quality difference being reported between these amps. I am only saying that since it's not all that hard to control for this factor, I wish someone would do that when they report on the perceived sound quality differences.
-
This is an ultra simplified answer but cuts to the chase. The loudest (most powerful) wins. No one knows these amps better than Bruno and he has told us the difference, check Rclarks post. More power, done properly always wins the contest. This is why I have bridged 400's, you have more head room, authority, clarity, better control, dynamics and just plan more fun :thumb:
By the way my balance DAC / Pre just arrived last night so I will write a short review in a few days. Also will have a single ended Lampizator 4.5 with remote volume for sale soon.
-
my balance DAC / Pre just arrived last night
Which one?
-
The new Lampizater with the retro chip, remote volume, balanced. It ads a little sweetness to the Ncore since it has tube, rectifier and output stage. It has a lot of detail, liquid detail LOL.
-
If I'm not mistaken, the Veritas is built with room for bridging, so there must be something to it here.
-
This is an ultra simplified answer but cuts to the chase. The loudest (most powerful) wins.
I agree with the loudest. Doesn't need to be the most powerful. I have done a bunch of blind listening tests with various people, and in most tests, people prefer even a mp3 file over a high-res FLAC is the mp3 file is even 1 dB louder... So any difference in gain/volume will make a difference in listening results.
-
If I'm not mistaken, the Veritas is built with room for bridging, so there must be something to it here.
Rclark, I wouldn't read too much out of that.
Excerpted from Bruno's " Is class D finally ready to compete with class A" talk presented at HighEnd 2012 in Munich:
"With an amplifier like Ncore, getting the placement of a part or trace wrong by one millimeter is the difference between top performance and not getting the thing to work at all."
With such a recent categoric statement from the Master himself, does not make you wonder what adding "bridging" circuitry/connectivity/conversion switching, etc., does to the milimetric fine tuning of each of the independent NC modules being bridged (particularly if done by an improvising DIYer)?
munosmario
-
Wow Munosmario, you mean if I unbridge my 400's they will even be better! What am I waiting for thanks for the tip! :duh:
-
Wow Munosmario, you mean if I unbridge my 400's they will even be better! What am I waiting for thanks for the tip! :duh:
Point well taken. But IIRC he specifically stated his points concerning the downside of bridging (well established to now) do not apply to Brown's amp and may not apply to Ncore.
I just wonder how long my hearing would last "upgrading" from three measly NC400 to bridged versions. I worked at the Record Plant whose control rooms had two JBL 15s and huge horn lens in each of four corners (active crossover, Crown 300s), and know well the thermally uncompressed dynamics of AudioKinesis (per Lynn Olsen the loudest/cleanest ever auditioned). Unrestricted dynamic range can corrupt one's sense of loud.
-
Wow Munosmario, you mean if I unbridge my 400's they will even be better! What am I waiting for thanks for the tip! :duh:
Wow to you too, playingtheblues. I would never dare to tell you what sounds good to you. You already said two posts ago that "The loudest (most powerful) wins." So, that's it for you: two bridged NC400 play/sound louder, so, they win. But as you well know, loudness and dynamics are only a couple of the dozen or more attributes of ultimate Sound Quality. As I said before (Post #16), if headroom is what your loudspeakers/system need (at the sound levels you like to listen), then, bridging two NC400 will be your ticket (as apparently it has been the case), but that does not mean, at all, that the performance of the bridged arrangement has accross the board the same or, let alone, improve the top sonic performance of a single NC400--as "milimetrically" designed and fine-tuned by Bruno. If you want to go deeper on the meaning of Bruno's "millimeter" statement (in itself and as it relates to this topic), please, contact him and ask directly.
munosmario
-
This gets into that nebulous quality of thermal dynamic compression. During an instrumental tone's dynamic envelope the quality of the waveform changes dramatically over time. Leading edge transients suffer most from thermal dynamic compression. Such transients largely determine differences between instrumental timbres.
Listeners whose systems thermally compress at low to moderate levels (most systems) are less likely to value a higher thermal dynamic envelope simply because they don't know what they're missing.
MP3 is much more dynamically compressed than high-res files. Less dynamic range sounds louder (shouty) even if the average level is the same.
-
Everyone be careful on how loud you play your system, or you will be selling your prized system due to tinnitus.
http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/hearing/pages/ruler.aspx
-
Realistically, I think the dangers are elsewhere - for most people, anyway. I think the biggest threat is in the environment, like loud continuous sounds made by various types of machinery or wind roar under a motorcycle helmet - that sort of thing.
I have tinnitus, but i think it was caused by 12 hour a day exposure to the sound of engines in a big ship's engine room. We had hearing protection, but I don't think it was enough to prevent damage. It might also have been caused by one or another of two cretinous sound men handling the PA at a couple of concerts I went to 30 years ago. One of them caused a strong whistling and major (~80%) hearing loss for two days. I thought I had done permanent damage at the time. One of these sound men had a T shirt proclaiming "If it's too loud, you're too old". They were a visiting band from Scotland who seemed determined to prove that Celtic music could rock out. Unfortunately, their interpretation of "rocking out" involved little more than being really loud. Like, I'd guess 135dB peaks.
My ears have whistled fairly quietly but continuously at around 3kHz for these last 30-odd years.
Back to NCore - sorry. :oops:
-
Everyone be careful on how loud you play your system, or you will be selling your prized system due to tinnitus.
http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/hearing/pages/ruler.aspx
According to that site,everybody either deaf or got tinnitus by now.
lapsan
-
The Mola Mola amps will be appearing in the coming weeks and so the 400 vs 1200 debate may resurface. In fact I'm going to try and trigger it! On the Atsah website it gives quotes from some beta testers who frequent these pages. It would be great to hear unedited comments from them on their impressions of how the Atsah amps at least compared to their 400 amps. You know who you are guys!
-
The Mola Mola amps will be appearing in the coming weeks and so the 400 vs 1200 debate may resurface. In fact I'm going to try and trigger it! On the Atsah website it gives quotes from some beta testers who frequent these pages. It would be great to hear unedited comments from them on their impressions of how the Atsah amps at least compared to their 400 amps. You know who you are guys!
I don't own either one, but the Atsahs were much smoother than the Ncores 400's in my system as well as being more holographic.
-
NC400 mono seem to define specific locations of images in the sound stage better than anything else I auditioned at home. Atma Sphere images may be more holographic, but NC400 seem to define image locations better.
Just a couple examples, both cases listening to a Live James Taylor CD. Audience members seem to locate 75' or more beyond front and side walls. Also, James has a high quality moderately large group of back ground singers. Bruno's amp defines their exact semi circle shape behind James and the exact distance between the singers and James. It's uncanny. Two professional musicians and one luthier heard this same phenomena and made involuntary verbal reactions to the music. It's pretty cool hearing non-audiophiles use audiophile terms to define what they are hearing.
-
Thanks both. I have NC400s and think they are terrific, hence the curioisity about the 1200s.
-
I don't own either one, but the Atsahs were much smoother than the Ncores 400's in my system as well as being more holographic.
Of course, this comparison of yours was done without both amps on hand to compare, from memory with a few months apart.
-
Of course, this comparison of yours was done without both amps on hand to compare, from memory with a few months apart.
Most who have had both liked the 1200 over the 400. This is what I glean from those who have offered their first hand opinion.
http://www.audionervosa.com/index.php?topic=4182.0
Just the facts...
Jim
-
That's right, I can believe it sounds better in some systems, but his comparison is pretty suspect. Same with the TBI, he was ready to bash the moment he got the amp.
Can't really compare amps from a fuzzy memory in your head.
Just like when the Vapor Breeze shows up here I'm not going to try and compare it to the N1X from a year and a half old memory.
-
That's right, I can believe it sounds better in some systems, but his comparison is pretty suspect. Same with the TBI, he was ready to bash the moment he got the
You are so wrong on that one rclark. I was ready to buy the Ncore 400's but they did not work in my system. I wound up buying a Stello AI700 for more money. That amp is very close to the Atsahs NC1200 s that beat the Ncore 400's. But the Stello has remote and 500wpc.
-
i have 3 nc400 monoblocks, and i have 2 of merrill's veritas amps (got here last saturday), i plan to sit down this weekend for a nice comparison, i am no audiophile as some people call themselves though, so i'm not sure if i can throw out any comparisons of them that wouldn't sound overly simplified.
-
i have 3 nc400 monoblocks, and i have 2 of merrill's veritas amps (got here last saturday), i plan to sit down this weekend for a nice comparison, i am no audiophile as some people call themselves though, so i'm not sure if i can throw out any comparisons of them that wouldn't sound overly simplified.
Audiophile pretensions are not required, happy to just hear whether you think there is much difference!
-
i am no audiophile as some people call themselves though, so i'm not sure if i can throw out any comparisons of them that wouldn't sound overly simplified.
One simple, honest opinion is worth more than 10 "reviews" full of fluff. The problem with subjective audiophile terminology is that the meaning of words varies depending on your background, culture and "school". Just as an example - to some "holographic" is a good thing, to others it implies plastic-y, exaggerated shiny artificiality. Your mileage veries...
-
Simple is good. Never underestimate the power of simple. :thumb: Just tell us what the rest of your system is and which amp you liked better. If you can describe why simply that is even better.
i have 3 nc400 monoblocks, and i have 2 of merrill's veritas amps (got here last saturday), i plan to sit down this weekend for a nice comparison, i am no audiophile as some people call themselves though, so i'm not sure if i can throw out any comparisons of them that wouldn't sound overly simplified.
-
probably going to be a few hundred hours of play time before i should comment on nc400 vs nc1200, my nc400 probably have a few hundred hours of usage already
my nc1200 probably hit a hour today, unsure of how much factory burn in it had
asides from my all my power cords, interconnects and speaker cables are newish, my AV123 LS6 speakers just got some upgrade parts earlier in the week as well, and my modwright oppo has as much burn in as Dan managed to put in before shipping.
-
my nc1200 probably hit a hour today, unsure of how much factory burn in it had
asides from my all my power cords, interconnects and speaker cables are newish, my AV123 LS6 speakers just got some upgrade parts earlier in the week as well, and my modwright oppo has as much burn in as Dan managed to put in before shipping.
I thought you said you aren't an audiophile... :)
-
hmmmm, it's 5-24-13
any thoughts?
simple observations are always
appreciated & relevant.