0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 10997 times.
Why did you like it better than NCore?
perhaps because you can't manufacture amps with the nc400 as it is only sold to individuals, not companies. And, the nc1200, which is the commercial product, would place the product in a much higher price bracket/much smaller market.
Exactly!! You would be surprised at how cheap the nc1200 boards can be had and how high the profit margins are lol Best, Matt
We like the Pascal board more than the nCore board for a few reasons and some of them our based on opinions and personal preferences, on paper they perform relatively the same.
Does the Pascal amp have flat frequency response into actual loudspeaker loads, like the Hypex UcD/Ncore, Ice ASX2, and Abeltec modules? Or is it a traditional class D amp (like Tripath, IR2092, etc.) that performs basically like a high-power SET in the midrange?
The data sheet can be seen here: http://www.pascal-audio.com/downloads/S-PRO2_Datasheet-1_10.pdfWe have been playing a board for months now and it has a very flat frequency response. Best, Matt
Thread has gone cold, what's up ?
Thanks MattI could not conmect to the Pascal link above. Have you another please ?
Your buffer circuit that drives the Pascal's 2.2k input impedance is obviously going to have a significant impact on the amps subjective sound. Would you please describe that circuity, in as much detail as you're willing to share.TIA,Paul
Pascal based amps generally require an input buffer because the input impedance of the modules alone is very low. From pics, it appears that Aluminati uses the input buffers available from Pascal (same as supplied with their eval kits) and D-sonic designs their own input buffer. Both of these input buffers appear to be IC opamp based. The input buffer is likely going to have a significant influence on the sonic signature, so I think it would be unwise to assume that different Pascal implementations would sound the same....