0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 70571 times.
The NC 1200's sounded quite a bit better than Jason's NC400 tour amps ...
please expand "a bit better".
So how many companies were using NC400's at RMAF rhis year? Zero? Why, if they are the best?
Smoother, more open, and more holographic. And by quite a bit.
I have changed these parts many times on amps with the better parts giving the better sound.
The NC400 is intended for the hobbyist market, the 1200 for the OEM market, so the fact that OEM companies use the 1200 and not the 400 proves that the Hypex positioning strategy works, but nothing else.
WRONG: the NC-400 modules are mass produced parts, not finely honed, totally custom, F1 engines. NC-400 modules incorporate many compromises in parts quality, design, and manufacture in order to make them cost effective in the marketplace for consumers.If one wants to make an accurate analogy between an F1 engine and an audio component, one is going to be considering cost no object designs produced in very limited quantities, without regard to costs: the Light Harmonic Da Vinci Dac comes to mind, but even that is produced in numbers far beyond those of F1 engines, and is for sale to consumers, unlike F1 engines.
The real debate centres around what is considered acceptable and appropriate as evidence of phenomena and also what kind of questions are being asked about external (objective?) and internal (experiential?) reality, and (on that basis) what kind of phenomena are being studied.
sure, the NC400 incorporates many compromises in parts quality, but Bruno has the outrageousness to call the NC400 a "no-compromise power amp module for audiophile DIY projects"???Sorry, but i'll take Bruno's word anytime over yours!Please tell me somthing: you made changes many times and you got "better" sound. "Better" compared to what? To some "objective reference" or to your personal liking?
Noise and/or distortion under steady state signals are not enough to understand what may happen in circuit with complex and widely varying signals. Intermodulation tests with many different frequencies, and square wave tests at many different frequencies might be more illuminating as to what makes for differences in amplifier sound.
While I find the NC-400 sounds very good, it does have its shortcomings as well. Images are somewhat hollow, they are well defined in a single plane, but lack in body.
What I also wonder about, is why would any self declared objectivist think that THD measurements define amplifier performance?
Hahaha, you funny Waver! Answer this question if you please: If you really believe that the Ncore modules are no compromise designs, and that Mr Putzeys truly believes that, how do you account for the 3x cost of the Mola Mola amplifiers made by Mr Putzey's own brand?
so, in other words, you say Mr Putzeys is a liar when he calles the NC400 a "no-compromise power amp module for audiophile DIY projects"?Btw, i have not made any comment at all about the ncores! I'm just trying to quantify/qualify statements like 'sounds better' or 'improved quality' ...
Julf: Exactly, the standard set of measurements are inadequate. Given that few people have the gear to do even a good job at the standard measurement sets (and for Ncore that means an AP-2, nothing else is going to have nearly the resolution on standard tests as the Ncore itself), it is unlikely that the many posters here are going to have a way to make these measurements.
Page created in 0.043 seconds with 27 queries.