AudioCircle
Other Stuff => Archived Circles => Hypex Owners Circle => Topic started by: WGH on 28 Jun 2013, 03:16 am
-
I have been following the NCore saga ever since 6 Moons review in February 2012 and the start of the NCore Circle so I jumped at the chance to get one on a long term loan this summer. I was more curious than itching for a switch being more than satisfied with the new AVA FET Valve Hybrid DAC, AVA FET Valve Hybrid pre-amp and Synergy 450 amp driving the Salk HT2-TL speakers. Wiring is Straightwire Encore and a double run of Kimber 4VS.
With all the glowing reviews I was ready to love this little guy but so far the NCore has been a big let down. Admittedly on it's own it can sound great. A friend and his son came by for a listening session, it's good to have a young pair of ears in the mix, and he loved them - until I replaced the NCore with the Synergy 450. The NCores then sounded unexciting, the mid-range was recessed, the highs are a little brittle, and the bass is not as defined or as deep as the AVA amp.
Salk speakers are not a bright speaker, in fact at first listen they might sound a little dull but in reality it's all there. The RAAL tweeter is very smooth with very little distortion so it can reveal anything amiss upstream and it revealed the NCores limitations. Change the tweeter to a silk dome and you'll never hear it. I have heard pre-amps, interconnects and speaker wire that soften the highs so perhaps a combination of those elements tune the NCore's sound in systems.
fsimms post illustrates the point that getting the NCore to sound good may require a bit of tuning:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=117771.msg1236460#msg1236460 (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=117771.msg1236460#msg1236460)
...I then used warm NOS Mullard tubes in my tube preamp and the McCormack easily lost the battle. By comparison, the McCormack seemed to be less clear and less musical. The McCormack did a bit better with low bass impact.... The Mullards did seem to soften the high treble...
Bass was real close, I could live with it but the mid-range was the deal breaker, it just didn't work with the HT2-TL's.
Steve said it pretty well (it's all my fault, I invited him over):
I listened to the Ncores with the Salk HT2-TL speakers. Unfortunately, it was very apparent that they were a bit disappointing on the many vocals we listened to, as they rendered the vocals unnaturally thin and nasal compared to the AVA Synergy 450 and modified Naim amplifiers (both very good amplifiers in their own right) that got the vocals just right. They also were a bit shrill on super dynamic high frequency passages that the other amplifiers rendered without harshness.
The Ncores won for efficiency/power saving and a smaller enclosure, but were just lacking in sound compared to the other amplifiers. I was a little surprised after all the hype and for the fact that the Salk HT2-TL are probably fairly representative of a fair number of 4Ω, ~ 88dB speakers with conventional cone drivers and ribbon tweeters.
Class D amplifiers in general seem to have more variable results depending on the speaker type and load, and these were no different. I'm sure there are speakers that sound much better when paired with the Ncores, but these Salks were not one of them.
We all did agree that the little round Ncore modules were cute as a button, though. And that the Salk HT2-TL are very nice speakers.
I recommend an audition before purchasing.
Steve
Edited to correct the AVA amplifier model from Synergy 350 to Synergy 450
I also had a second listening session with a totally system at flashgo's house with his modded Naim electronics and Linn Isobaric speakers. The primary reason was to compare DAC's but we did stick the NCore in for a trial. I was not familiar with the sound of his system but the look of horror and disgust on flashgo's face told it all, the NCore didn't stay plugged in for very long.
DAC Comparison http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=117771.msg1236415#msg1236415 (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=117771.msg1236415#msg1236415)
Tyson's conclusion was spot on, this is an excerpt, click on the link - he liked them - sort of:
So, how did my tube amps fare? Worse in every category I can think of except one. The one area the tubes did better was tonal density. There were simply more tonal variety and saturation for different instruments. Not so much in the highs, which sounded pretty much the same on both amps, but in the mids. Easier to hear the difference between violins, violas, cellos, and double basses.
Unfortunately, tonality is the single most important factor for me when listening to a system, so the tube amps are staying. They actually did pretty well in the dynamics, transparency, soundstaging areas, but were definitely not at the level of the nCores.
So I guess I'm a tone guy. The NCores have a terrific soundstage and dynamics but the tone just doesn't do it for me.
All you guys can't be wrong. Maybe I got a bum one, anyone got an NCore in Tucson or Phoenix we can compare this one to? Expect follow-ups.
Wayne
-
NCores and Wayne's ...........:)
Are you able to post up the impedance mag and phase on your Salks and for the record, we found similarities with the Class-d Rotels and Bel Canto's compared to a Krell KSA300 and Threshold S500's ...
Regards...
-
Rotel, and the bel cantos use ICE modules. I am very familiar with how ICE based amps sound, and find very little common ground between them and nCore. In fact, anyone who mentions similarities between these two amps has got me wondering what the heck is going on???
Additionally, I think it is very important for the nCores to remain powered up, they really do not sound all that good on power up from cold, and generally seem to need to be powered up for quite awhile to sound good (hours at least, if not overnight). So quick comparisons of this type will not give a valid impression of how they sound.
-
Additionally, I think it is very important for the nCores to remain powered up, they really do not sound all that good on power up from cold, and generally seem to need to be powered up for quite awhile to sound good (hours at least, if not overnight). So quick comparisons of this type will not give a valid impression of how they sound.
I have never read that before. I have had them on for hours while I put down a wood floor in my bedroom. A good test of a system is do something else in another room. If a song draws you back in to sit in the sweet spot you got a winner, this never happened with the NCore.
I got pics:
(http://www.wghwoodworking.com/audio/ncore1.jpg)
(http://www.wghwoodworking.com/audio/ncore_inside.jpg)
The only impedance or phase plots for the HT2-TL I have seen is at Audioholics but the measurements may not be current because the tweeter is different.
http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/speakers/floorstanding/salk-sound-veracity-ht2-tl/ht2-tl-set-up (http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/speakers/floorstanding/salk-sound-veracity-ht2-tl/ht2-tl-set-up)
Wayne
-
Rotel, and the bel cantos use ICE modules. I am very familiar with how ICE based amps sound, and find very little common ground between them and nCore. In fact, anyone who mentions similarities between these two amps has got me wondering what the heck is going on???
Additionally, I think it is very important for the nCores to remain powered up, they really do not sound all that good on power up from cold, and generally seem to need to be powered up for quite awhile to sound good (hours at least, if not overnight). So quick comparisons of this type will not give a valid impression of how they sound.
Well step aside buddy, there are those who prefer the Ice sound to Hypex...... Go figure ....... :lol:
-
Guys as an aside please be advised that these class "D" amps do not sound as good from a cold start after being unplugged for awhile. When we demo class "D" we plug the amps in for at least an hour before any music is played. Actually we prefer not traveling with the amps. They need to settle all over again. Why ?? WTFK. Our manf. tells us it is the power supply.
So if one is to demo any class "D" amp let it sit a day or two plugged in. Our experience anyway.
charles
-
Thanks Barrows and Charles. You posted at the right time. I powered down the NCores yesterday to make a configuration change. I then played my Gerry Rafferty album and it sounded so bad that I questioned my judgment that the NCores were for me. I switched back to my old McCormack and the sound was so much better. After leaving the NCores on all night, I played the album again. It sounds wonderful. I still miss the warmth of the McCormack with this LP, but the NCores have other charms that make it a good trade for me. The NCores seem more natural, transparent and detailed. This LP doesn’t show off the NCores great sound staging abilities.
Wayne, your descriptions sound like what I am hearing. If anything your descriptions sound better than what I am hearing when I cold power the NCores. I have a break before make switch on the speaker wires so I can switch between hot amps safely. This allows me to do an instant A/B comparison without power cycling.
The NCores belong to a friend of mine and I have only had them for about three weeks and am still learning about them. I haven’t yet checked out the brittle highs you talk about as I want to bypass my tube amp for that test.
Bob
-
Salk speakers are not a bright speaker, in fact at first listen they might sound a little dull but in reality it's all there. The RAAL tweeter is very smooth with very little distortion so it can reveal anything amiss upstream and it revealed the NCores limitations. Change the tweeter to a silk dome and you'll never hear it...
By "silk tweeter" do you mean any silk tweeter on the planet earth? You have heard them all, including those selling for several hundreds of dollars employed in $100k/pr msrp systems? I'd love to see your database. Possibly a glaring, useless, and only misleading generalization.
Speakers are engineered systems, more so multi way speakers than single driver. IOW there is no such thing as simply removing a ribbon tweeter and replacing it with a dome then making accurate generalizations based on results.
Please correct me if wrong, but IIRC John Krutke of Zaph Audio thoroughly tested THD of RAAL tweeters. The best domes he tested post significantly lower THD.
-
I don't think WGH needs to alter his statement regarding silk dome tweeters.
It is his OPINION after all.
Scotty
-
Yeah, sweeping generalisations about soft dome tweeters probably should be avoided, consider: should we equate the Raal with all ribbons?
My speakers use the older top of the line Revelator tweeters, these are pretty good tweeters, probably the new Air Circ model is a teeny bit better in an equal implementation, but we are talking world class drivers here in any case.
I suspect that what we are really discussing here are symptoms of system matching more than anything else. The more I listen to the nCore with different sources, the more I conclude that the nCore is the transparent component, and it is just revealing the strengths and weaknesses of what is around it. Although, I will suggest my nCore amp improved in body by upgrading the AC input wiring from stock (as always YMMV). Certainly, if you take a slightly foggy, slighty warm, tubby amp out of a system, and plop in the nCore, the nCore will sound lean by comparison: who is to blame here?
I just listened to nCore on a different DAC for test purposes of a network player (Sonore Rendu, excellent BTW). This DAC has a Wolfson 8741 with discrete regulators, and with a TI OPA1632 based output stage. The nCore clearly revealed why I prefer my ESS based B-IIIse DAC with its fully discrete no global feedback output stage. While the OPA1632 DAC had tons of air, and detail up the ying yang, it did not have the organic character, and fully fleshed out midrange properties (while retaining all the detail as well) which are present with the discrete output stage DAC. If I do the same comparison with my Pass X150.5, the differences are still audible, but they are reduced-my conclusion from this is that the Pass is adding a little color of its own, which is reducing the differences between the two DACs.
The nCore is really helping me fine tune my DAC build, and hear differences between different modes of operation, as well as power supply configurations, resistor choices, etc. And for sure, leave them powered up-standby, via nAmpon seems OK to use though, with an hour warm up period or so.
-
Please correct me if wrong, but IIRC John Krutke of Zaph Audio thoroughly tested THD of RAAL tweeters. The best domes he tested post significantly lower THD.
I just recently read some interesting comments by another speaker designer, on another site, that Krutke did not test them correctly. He had them crossed over too low, and the slopes were too shallow. His higher distortion specs were due to this, not inherent shortcomings in the tweeters themselves.
-
By "silk tweeter" do you mean any silk tweeter on the planet earth? You have heard them all, including those selling for several hundreds of dollars employed in $100k/pr msrp systems? I'd love to see your database. Possibly a glaring, useless, and only misleading generalization.
:duh: It was an broad generalization, not a fact. I think almost everyone understood what I meant. Generally and historically speaking silk dome tweeters have a sweeter and less aggressive presentation compared to say...a metal dome; a more forgiving and musical representation of poorly recorded music than a ruthlessly revealing warts and all design.
I like the Revelator tweeters and the beryllium tweeter by ScanSpeak sounds excellent pared with the Revelator 4531 in the Odyssey Reference Monitor.
Wayne
-
Wayne: Hmmm? I am confused. Most seem to describe the Raal as having a rather relaxed presentation? I do not know, as I have not listened to a speaker featuring the raal at length.
In any case, I think it is misleading to suggest that metal domes might be more accurate than the best soft domes. Generally speaking, what metal domes do offer is big resonant peaks, often very close to the range in which one wants to use them. It is most peoples' opinion that these resonant peaks are responsible for the often forward, even harsh sound sometimes associated with metal domes (metal mid ranges often have these problems as well). Even the very best beryllium domes have this problem (look at the response curves for Scan Speak's beryllium dome versus the same model tweeter with the soft dome, the air circ). Using metal domes can be quite complex for the speaker designer, usually requiring the use of complex notch filters and such (near the audible range) to tame the resonances.
What is happening very often with a metal dome tweeter, is that the audiophile is forced to pair such a speaker with a very forgiving system, in order to get listenable treble response-OK, of course this is a generalisation, and some metal domes may be implemented in a such a way as this is not a problem, as in Rockport's designs with the Scan Speak Beryllium tweeter.
My point being, that it is generally easier for a speaker designer to produce an accurate (without resonant peaks making it bright) and neutral treble response with a soft dome tweeter than a metal dome. Note that YG Acoustics still uses a customised version of the Scan Speak soft dome in their top of the line over $100K speakers, even though they could certainly afford to use the beryllium model.
-
This taught me something about beryllium characteristics - the tuning fork experiment with three identical size tuning forks machined out of aluminum, titanium and beryllium and demo'd at a trade show:
http://materion.com/~/media/Files/PDFs/Electrofusion/TTB002_TuningForks.pdf
and some definitive further data (unfortunately, silk domes are not included in the comparison):
http://materion.com/~/media/Files/PDFs/Electrofusion/PLS2011PAPERFINAL.pdf
-
Russell: thanks for the info, I think it is relatively understood now that for a metal dome tweeter, beryllium is the best material, if it is done right. Some berylliuym domes are a lot better than others, and then of course there is the entire rest of the design...
I encourage folks to take a look at the Scan Speak website, and compare the frequency response of their best soft dome (the air circ) and their beryllium model. These are two tweeters where the only difference is the dome material, my understanding is that the rest of the design is the same. The beryllium dome extends a little further, but the response is also a lot more ragged. This has some serious implications for speaker designers who want to use it. I recall reading an interview with Andy Payor (Rockport) who mentioned that the Scan Speak beryllium is a great tweeter, but that it requires some very tricky manipulations to make it work well.
-
Now finally I'll have to admit using the silk/metal dome comparison was a not such a good idea, these days there is probably not much difference between the two. It's probably an age thing. Back in the stereo stone age of the '70's metal domes had a bad reputation and I retained those prejudices. Solid state electronics were harsher sounding back then and a soft dome tweeter just sounded better, the Acoustic Research 3a speaker is one example but if you heard one today it would sound very rolled off in the highs. The 3a's at a clients house certainly did.
Now if you want to hear beryllium done well check out the TAD Compact Reference 1 or the other TAD models.
And yes, the RAAL do have a relaxed presentation but that does not infer that are rolled off, they just don't call attention to themselves like the YG speakers that boldly announce their presence and demand your attention.
Wayne
-
I just recently read some interesting comments by another speaker designer, on another site, that Krutke did not test them correctly. He had them crossed over too low, and the slopes were too shallow. His higher distortion specs were due to this, not inherent shortcomings in the tweeters themselves.
My bad. I checked John's website. He indeed tested several ribbons and planars but not the RAAL.
http://www.zaphaudio.com/nondomes/
-
What an interesting report of your listening impressions.
Your listening impressions may be personally valid, but whether the conclusions drawn are valid from
an empirical test point of view is difficult.
Were you able to control for any potential sources of bias?
Was the voltage gain on the 2 different power amplifier adjusted to be equal?
Or did you use a level compensated preamplifier? Did you try an unsighted
listening comparison?
I have done a variety of listening comparions and found many fascinating results.
Recently a listener asked me if we were listening to a Class A amplifier,
when in fact it was a class D amplifier sitting next to a class A (famous brand model,
turned off) He was enjoying himself until I told him it was class D and his mood changed.
Other people opening ridiculed the minuscule size, lack of weight in he power supply,
or use of cheap gold plated copper binding posts. Turns out I had plugged in
the famous class A...
You may think you can trust your ears, but the brain/ear/emotion interface is complex...
-
but whether the conclusions drawn are valid from
an empirical test point of view is difficult.
C'mon, let's not second guess the hell out of others impressions. Yes, WGH may or may not have done blind listening tests. And I will assume that the amps were level matched, if time and circumstances permitted it.
On the ncore tour, I found the same thing that WGH mentioned about the ncores. They were fabulous at the extremes, but jackman and I preferred the midrange of his Coda amp to the ncore, which wasn't as fleshed out. Though, jackman did end up buying ncores, and I think his preamp helped address the midrange leanness he heard in my system with the ncores and my preamp (Musical Fidelity kW).
tktran303, I don't know where you fall on the ncore fanboy spectrum, but I hope you would have written the same thing even if the conclusions were reversed.
-
Were you able to control for any potential sources of bias?
Was the voltage gain on the 2 different power amplifier adjusted to be equal?
Or did you use a level compensated preamplifier? Did you try an unsighted
listening comparison?
If there was any bias, it was for the NCore going into the comparison.
The amp comparison was a fun way to spend a hot Tucson afternoon, not a scientific experiment. We plugged them in and listened. The NCore has enough potential that Herman may still build a pair for the woofers of his tri-amped speakers knowing they can easily be sold if they don't work out.
Wayne
-
And with nearly 2000 posts on AC, I feel safe assuming that WGH knows what he is doing.
-
And with nearly 2000 posts on AC, I feel safe assuming that WGH knows what he is doing.
So post count dictates knowledge? :scratch: I'll disagree with that otherwise I'd be close to a Ph.D.
-
So post count dictates knowledge? :scratch: I'll disagree with that otherwise I'd be close to a Ph.D.
Well Dr. Jtwrace, I'd say it is a decent enough crude indicator. Though low post count can't be taken as an indicator of lack of knowledge. But if you have that many posts, you are likely to be aware of he potential for bias, and aware of the importance of level matching.
-
Hey Guys,
I'm a fan of the NCore and, as Roscoe has stated, purchased mine after the trial. It's the best sounding amp I have had in my system, IMO, but it's cool if other people feel differently. We all have different tastes and if the evaluation was legitimate (I'm certain it was) there is no reason to question Wayne or anyone eles. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, even if it's different than mine.
This thread reminds me of Axpona 2013. I remember leaving a room that was absolutely unlistenable (IMO) and, as I walked out of the room hearing some guys behind me rave about how it was their favorite room of the show and that they would immediately buy the system if they won the lottery. In fact, something similar happened several times (to me) at Axpona. There were a few systems that just sounded really bad to me (piercing highs, sloppy bass, etc.) but were highly rated by others. It was a fun and enlightening experience.
Lastly, I did not think the NCore sounded as good in Roscoe's system (with his SS preamp) as it does in mine but our systems are so different it's hard to pinpoint why that was the case. Also, it's highly likely we have different opinions and preferences. I'm happy with my decision to get an Ncore and appreciate JTWrace's generosity in letting me hear his amps during the demo.
Cheers,
J
-
Lastly, I did not think the NCore sounded as good in Roscoe's system (with his SS preamp) as it does in mine but our systems are so different it's hard to pinpoint why that was the case. Also, it's highly likely we have different opinions and preferences. I'm happy with my decision to get an Ncore and appreciate JTWrace's generosity in letting me hear his amps during the demo.
Cheers,
J
Totally agree that the ncores didn't seem to be a great match with my preamp. Goes to show, once again, that synergy is everything. Looking forward to hearing jackman's ncores in his system one of these days. Jack, we are long overdue to catch up.
-
Hi Roscoe,
I agree! It's been too long and I look forward to getting together. Also, for the record, my impression of the NCore amps is as positive as ever. I enjoyed giving the NCore group a hard time at first but the amp sounds great in my system. I also like the fact that it is very energy efficient and runs very cool, even when I play my system loud. My subwoofer amp (Crown K1) gets much hotter than the NCore.
-
The amp comparison was a fun way to spend a hot Tucson afternoon, not a scientific experiment. We plugged them in and listened.
We did spend half the time zeroing in on midrange vocals which seemed to show more apparent differences between the amps that wasn't as apparent auditioning mixed instrumental material.
Perhaps some other variables beyond the speakers themselves contributed to them not being a great match with the Ncores. Maybe there wasn't enough warm up time, as was mentioned previously. Maybe it had less to do with the actual load the Salk HT2-TLs themselves presented to the amp and maybe the Ncores just weren't happy with the electrical characteristics of the dual runs of Kimber 4VS? Maybe it had something to do with those little ground enhancer thingies hanging off of one speaker terminal?
Like Wayne said, nothing really scientific. I still have a gut feeling that these Ncore amps (and a number of other Class D amplifiers) are a just bit more sensitive to speaker load impedance and the different capacitance and inductance characteristics of various speaker cables.
Steve
-
I've heard the nCores a few different times now and every time my opinion of them gets worse.
-
I've heard the nCores a few different times now and every time my opinion of them gets worse.
NC1200's too?
-
Yep.
-
I'll be curious to see if any of the NC1200 based NCore amps show up at RMAF and if demo disks will be allowed.
-
I'll be curious to see if any of the NC1200 based NCore amps show up at RMAF and if demo disks will be allowed.
Safe to say that the 1200s will be there I think.
-
I'll be curious to see if any of the NC1200 based NCore amps show up at RMAF and if demo disks will be allowed.
They were last year and demo disks were allowed.
-
They were last year and demo disks were allowed.
Thanks, I missed last year because I bought a house and was in the middle of a move. Don't remember reading any RMAF reviews.
Just read the New York Audio Show 2013 MolaMola review http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=115952.msg1213742#msg1213742 (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=115952.msg1213742#msg1213742)
I haven't heard the large Vivid but if it sounds anything like the smaller Oval series then the low end needs as much help as possible, those opposing drivers can do strange things in a room. What I heard a couple of years ago (don't know what amps were used) was large amounts of ill-defined bass which I bet the NCore could help control.
The NCore's image very well so if there is no center image as mentioned in the review, it ain't the amps fault.
-
Tyson are they very talented, yet somehow boring? I've read something to that effect.
-
Hi guys,
I'have got a Audiocontrol Pantages G3 (http://www.audiocontrol.com/t35/16464/580577/Theater-Amplifiers/Home-Theater-Amplifier----Pantages-G3.html) power amp (H Class) and wanted to know if moving to Hypex NC400 would be an improvement in term of sonic performance.
I'm really happy with my audiocontrol but in audio we always want better.
I think Audiocontrol is based on ICE modules but they are really well customized.
(http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/9164/g34e.jpg)
regards.
-
Impossible to say for sure, impossible to know what your own preferences are.
Having said that, quite a few people prefer Hypex NC400 over ICE, and there should be an advantage of a mono block execution over 5 amplifiers sharing a single power supply.
-
@ Adhara ,
Simply really and as i tell my friends, keep FedEx close , best to try one for yourself, i have very rarely purchased electronics , especially when the amp is unknown and kept them around, if you dont like , rinse repeat and go again ..:)
That aside the NC1200 's are getting a lot of positive chatter , but sadly prices are heading north from some, is one really better than a used Krell evo series, tough choice really ...
Regards
-
Only thing is if you like them after lots of extended listening.
-
Still waiting to try one myself ...... :)
-
Hi guys,
I have got a power amp (H Class) and wanted to know if moving to Hypex NC400 would be an improvement in term of sonic performance.
I had a Cullen modded PS Audio GCC-500, which used the big Icepower modules, modded by Cullen.
After direct comparisons to Jason's tour NC400 amps I built my own and ran the comparisons again, only comparing the power amp section of the PS.
The NC400 is clearer, better focused overall, with a more extended top end and cleaner, more powerful bass. Better dynamics, too. Overall the Icepower sounded slightly muffled from top to bottom. I never felt the Icepower was muffled until I ran this comparison. The Icepower did not sound terrible, but the NC400 offered a cleaner window.
I ran the comparo for my audio group and everyone could clearly hear the difference, and all preferred the NC400.
The NC400 is a steal for the quality offered.
-
Your observations are similar to mine. Ncore sounds so clean and powerful. Highs are extended, bass is powerful and mids are very accurate. I only use the amp for the mids and highs of my system but I'm still a big fan of the Ncore. Maybe even a fanboy!
-
Maybe even a fanboy!
:o
-
Still waiting for JT and the NC magic .......... :D
-
Still waiting for JT and the NC magic .......... :D
Who's JT and what magic?
-
you tell me ................. :scratch:
-
The ST-500 is a pretty good implementation of the ICE modules
The NC400 have more detail, clearer soundstage, timbre just as good perhaps slightly better. Noise floor is significantly lower, yes I am a foot tapping, wow exclaiming fanboy
One caveat, I had to increase the amount of room treatment to handle the extra detail so as not to have a confused soundstage
Check my gallery to see the room treatment post NCore
-
Well step aside buddy, there are those who prefer the Ice sound to Hypex...... Go figure ....... :lol:
Never got around to messing with Ncores, only the earlier Hypex. The ICEpower modules are too impedance sensitive. Surprised I still have hair left............
The ICEpower ones generally sound better into speakers that have a fairly flat impedance curve.
-
mine is flat , 1.5 ohm until 200 hz .. :D
-
Hope you are not using the 1kW ICEpower. You do not want to know what the FR is, above 10 kHz. (Yes, I have measured it. Yuk.) (You will also note they only spec the "hanger" version to 1 kHz. There is a reason.)
Enjoy!
-
The latest generations of ICE (e.g. 125ASX2) have improved a bit in that regard.
Still, they're nowhere near the NCores.
-
Still, they're nowhere near the NCores.
Is there anything class d that is?
-
Is there anything class d that is?
ClassDaudio SDS470 it is (from what I heard).
-
ClassDaudio SDS470 it is (from what I heard).
Nah. I owned every one of them and not even close.
-
Is there anything class d that is?
Nope - none that I'm aware of, at least in terms of measured performance.
Subjectively anyone can claim anything, of course.
-
I've seen some great enclosures for Ncore.
But I'm looking for one (great design) with a front power button.
Most of them have no power button or rear power button (not very practical in many cases).
Any idea ? Thx
-
I've seen some great enclosures for Ncore.
But I'm looking for one (great design) with a front power button.
Most of them have no power button or rear power button (not very practical in many cases).
Any idea ? Thx
Make a hole and put it wherever you want. If you're going to purchase them from somewhere perhpas they can do it. You'll need to ask them though.
-
Make a hole and put it wherever you want. If you're going to purchase them from somewhere perhpas they can do it. You'll need to ask them though.
You could tuck a toggle switch under the front panel/under the case. Like many turn tables have their switch.
-
Has anyone done a playback recording to compare waveforms to the wav. file?
I often wonder if such crazy detail is legitimate given live listening, acoustically, in a quaint setting doesn't offer near the detail. But that said I like the gain in intamacy from close vocal mics on slower lines.
-
I often wonder if such crazy detail is legitimate given live listening, acoustically, in a quaint setting doesn't offer near the detail. But that said I like the gain in intamacy from close vocal mics on slower lines.
That is a very thought provoking post. I spent quite some time thinking about it. I think that a lot of the issue is due to the same effect that cleaning one’s glasses has. All of a sudden colors are too vivid; the world seems too bright and clear. Things seem very unnatural. You can’t blame the Ncores for having low distortion. If one hears too much detail then it was in the recording.
I had a similar problem when I put Ncores into my system. At first the Ncores seemed to be too bright and thin. The problem wasn’t just the Ncores. I had tailored my system thin and bright to offset the fullness and softness of my previous amp. I think speakers, preamps or sources are better choices for tailoring the sound of one’s system than amps are.
Salis, looking back at my post I see that one would think that I don’t agree with you. Actually, I agree with every word of your post. I am just trying to add my own twist.
Bob
-
I finished my NCore monos a few months ago. At the time, I had just installed some Goldpoints attenuators in my Plinius P12 preamp, Anticable interconnects and Anticable speaker wires on my JR Model 1. I connected everything and was ready to hear magic through my Nova Applause (MTM) speakers. The sound was too clear, harsh, and hyper detailed. I have recently read that someone describing their system as shouting at them. It was really nagging at me. Ideally I want to be able to determine the size of a venue by the subtle reflections of the instruments. I want to hear where the musicians were standing when they recorded the tracks. Too many changes only yielded disappointed. In order to listen to my music, I had to turn the volume down. It sounded fair at low volume but the ambient noise in my home drowned out the music. The midrange warmth and the depth of the sound stage my old amplifier created was gone. Maybe jumping from a 120 watt 4 ohms amp to a 400 watt amplifier was the straw that broke the camel’s back . I had extreme buyer’s remorse.
After a few days of this torment, I moved the speakers further apart, from 7 feet to 10 feet and maintained a 3 foot distance from wall. Since this was as far as my new 6 foot speaker wires stretched, I was just going to live with this hifi sound. It made my cds more listenable but was still missing something.
I had no idea after changing amps, wires and volume control speaker placement would have to be re-evaluated. I always thought once your speakers are placed the room acoustics wouldn’t be affected by equipment variations. Boy, was I wrong.
Now, I am into my 4th month with this system and only just now wondered how far I could pull the speakers apart before the stereo image would collapse. Out came the short jewel like Anticables and in went my ugly 10 foot long braided Teflon cat5 speaker wires. I stretched the speaker placement to 12 feet apart, 4 feet from the wall with a 1.5 inch tilt. This system is now detailed, panoramic and no longer “shouting” at me. I can live with these.
-
I found the Anticables very detailed but slightly tilted upward, maybe you had too much of a good thing. Its all about synergy, good luck.
-
I tried AntiCables for a very short stint just to see if all the hype was true but in my system they were nothing short of horrible.
No bass, too much treble and just plain wrong in all aspects of SQ.
Now I'm stuck with them forever because they were cheap enough to purchase and try but not worth attempting to resell because of the same. They now occupy a box full of similar bad memory purchases. :duh:
Come to think of it, I could make them into coat hangers and make some return on my investment
-
Hi,
I built a pair of NC400s each with its own SMPS600 in early 2013. The system round them is a laptop (MP3s and uncompressed WAVs) USB-feeding a Benchmark DAC1-USB, direct to the NC400s then on to PMC FB1+ speakers. Before the NC400s, I had a Musical Fidelity A3 integrated amplifier in their place. It also gets used for TV, S/PDIF into the benchmark.
I do occasional bits of PA work for local bands and have rigged for various local events. So, I've got used to hearing various PA set ups. Before I got the NC400s, the day after an event the main things I used to notice about my home system were a lack of 'slam' (i.e. 'punch', or 'kick') and a lack of high frequency detail and energy. Clearly, the home system is smaller in scale than a PA, but I wanted it to sound just as lively and dynamic as the best of the PA systems I was hearing at local events. Having retired the Musical Fidelity and replaced it with the NC400s, I now have the 'slam' and all the detail I want. Put simply, the NC400 paints with a much wider sonic palette than the Musical Fidelity - it's capable of reproducing a wider range of sounds, particularly high frequencies. I can see why the NC400 has seen some use in recording studios (e.g. gearslutz) - it lets you hear an awful lot.
So, it's strongly recommended :D.
Thanks,
Mark.
-
Hi,
I built a pair of NC400s each with its own SMPS600 in early 2013. The system round them is a laptop (MP3s and uncompressed WAVs) USB-feeding a Benchmark DAC1-USB, direct to the NC400s then on to PMC FB1+ speakers. Before the NC400s, I had a Musical Fidelity A3 integrated amplifier in their place. It also gets used for TV, S/PDIF into the benchmark.
I do occasional bits of PA work for local bands and have rigged for various local events. So, I've got used to hearing various PA set ups. Before I got the NC400s, the day after an event the main things I used to notice about my home system were a lack of 'slam' (i.e. 'punch', or 'kick') and a lack of high frequency detail and energy. Clearly, the home system is smaller in scale than a PA, but I wanted it to sound just as lively and dynamic as the best of the PA systems I was hearing at local events. Having retired the Musical Fidelity and replaced it with the NC400s, I now have the 'slam' and all the detail I want. Put simply, the NC400 paints with a much wider sonic palette than the Musical Fidelity - it's capable of reproducing a wider range of sounds, particularly high frequencies. I can see why the NC400 has seen some use in recording studios (e.g. gearslutz) - it lets you hear an awful lot.
So, it's strongly recommended :D .
Thanks,
Mark.
Glad you like them like us. :green: There is a bunch of info on this circle about them.
Welcome to AC!