Digital Amp Recommendations

JDUBS · « **on:** 24 Dec 2004, 07:19 pm »

Hey Guys

I'm working on an Azura horn set-up (similar to Oris horns) and was looking for some recommendations on amplification.

I'm really leaning towards the Vinni's Clari T amp for the horns (not sure yet on what drivers I will be using...probably start with Fostex FE206E's and then move to Lowthers).

For the bass cabinets (Oris Reference bass cabinets), I'm not sure. Perhaps the Teac 30w digital amp? The drivers in these cabinets are 100db / 1 watt, so I don't need much at all, but was thinking about giving them a little more headroom then the horns.

BTW, my digital source will be my PC streaming audio (uncompressed) via CAT5 to a wired Slimbox. The audio will then go from the Slimbox to a Behringer DCX2496 digital crossover which will then go to the amps.

Thanks for any and all recommendations!

-Jim

albee · « **Reply #1 on:** 24 Dec 2004, 10:19 pm »

Start with the $99 Teac from J&R. Pull the center channel board and start your journey. I own a slew of tripath devices and the Teac sounds more neutral (less warm) than the SI or Powerave. I'm not sure how warm the Clari-T is but the Teac is a hundred bucks and will break you into the overall sound. You may not have a reason to spend more . . . who knows?

JLM · « **Reply #2 on:** 25 Dec 2004, 11:46 am »

Fostex or Lowther type drivers can be ruthlessly revealing and typically prefer tube amplification, but are highly efficient. For me the Lowthers are too detailed (forcing me to pay too much attention to the detail and not being able to emotional attach to the music).

Therefore I'd recommend a 5 watt per channel battery powered Tripath, like Vinnie's or Wayne's (at Bolder Cable) with a tube pre-amp or at least a tubed player.

Hopefully there's a good bass pairing available for those horns. Last I heard Oris top of the line setup (a couple of years ago) the bass drivers couldn't mesh with the horns, making for a most uninviting disjointed sound. A better sounding and cheaper solution, especially if you're thinking of the Fostex FE206E drivers is the Two Rivers horns:

http://www.ccsdana.net/mhauk/

Don't look like much, but much cheaper. The real problem again is the bass. The recomended Yamaha subs are servo controlled (yuh!) and out of production. But the system did sound surprisely good at the 2003 MidWest Audio Fest to several folks I talked to.

Dmason · « **Reply #3 on:** 25 Dec 2004, 04:55 pm »

Jeff,

Had a look at Two Rivers; those things look like they were designed to house halogen bulbs, not drivers

Those are the same horns they use as "light lenses" at Costco... Have you heard them? They look like they could be manageable, not too big. I might like to try some if someone can first hand recommend them. The 206 or 208EZ might do nicely with a couple of small subs, and the ClariT.

jackman · « **Reply #4 on:** 25 Dec 2004, 05:52 pm »

Hey, I have one of those Yammy subwoofers and it sounds very good. Got it from a friend who wasn't using it so the price was right. Anyway, it doesn't rock the house but it's much better than you can imagine for a sub that sold for about $139 or so.

Don't know about the horns but two of those subs could sound good in a moderate sized room.

J

JDUBS · « **Reply #5 on:** 25 Dec 2004, 06:42 pm »

jackman is right on here. I actually have a pair of these Yamaha subs for my computer setup and they are pretty solid for the price. They go low and are quick. I bet those Two Rivers guys heard about the subs on AudioCircle as they were the subject of much discussion a little while back (prompted me to pick up a pair).

Regarding the integration with the bass cabinets. Not sure if Bert had his Reference Bass Cabinets a couple of years back but from what I understand these are lightyears ahead of the Onken cabinets also offered.

In addition, I hope to make use of the Behringer's Delay function to really tweak the bass integration.

The Azura's go lower then the Oris 150's, so hopefully that will help out as well.

Thanks again.

-Jim

Quote from: jackman

Hey, I have one of those Yammy subwoofers and it sounds very good. Got it from a friend who wasn't using it so the price was right. Anyway, it doesn't rock the house but it's much better than you can imagine for a sub that sold for about $139 or so.

Don't know about the horns but two of those subs could sound good in a moderate sized room.

J

doug s. · « **Reply #6 on:** 27 Dec 2004, 03:48 pm »

re: subs, i have a pair of yst-sw305's. same as the 205's but these have "two" drivers per sub, not one. no, they *aren't* as nice as my vmps larger subs, but they are excellent in their own right. i wouldn't trade 'em for rel strata's, for instance...

doug s.

doug s. · « **Reply #7 on:** 27 Dec 2004, 03:51 pm »

re: amps, now i am waiting for someone to do an a-b comparison of vinnie's amps w/wayne's....

doug s.

JLM · « **Reply #8 on:** 27 Dec 2004, 10:01 pm »

Dan,

They presented at the 2003 Midwest Audio Fest. I only got a quick chance to hear them, but they obviously sounded better than the Oris/Onken just due to the integration of horn/sub alone. Folks whom I trust had a chance to hear them for much longer said they did sound pretty good.

Yeah they sure don't look like much. I thought they looked more like semi trailer wheels.

Dmason · « **Reply #9 on:** 27 Dec 2004, 11:12 pm »

Doug

In my opinion it would be hard to imagine them sounding that much different. The magic in this design is the ability of this particular Tripath chip to be powered directly by battery, without the requirement of secondary power supplies and more complex implementation. I would bet money they sound just about identical, with maybe some sonic difference related to power capacitors etc. It is for this reason that I consider the battery power Tripath amp to be the very best example of a Tripath amplifier, from a sound quality standpoint, and I have heard about all there is out there. The AC powered Bel Canto eVo series sits pretty much on top of the heap in that realm.

Hope this helps.

JDUBS · « **Reply #10 on:** 28 Dec 2004, 02:03 am »

I agree with Dmason on that point as well. I think one would be hard pressed to do any better with Tripath than either the Clari T or the Boulder amps.

I would like to hear a shootout between those two, though!

-Jim

doug s. · « **Reply #11 on:** 28 Dec 2004, 03:16 pm »

dan & jim, thanks for the info. vinnie's amp certainly caught my attention, but w/my hi-efficiency speakers (97db/1w) rated at 14 ohms, the additional power from the bolder modded amps seems like it mite be a beter choice for me. i am not familiar enuff w/these to know whether they were basically the same type of amp; from what y'all say, it seems they are. still, a shootout *would* be nice...

thanks again,

doug s.

Wayne1 · « **Reply #12 on:** 28 Dec 2004, 06:57 pm »

I am using the Tripath evaluation board for the TA-2024 chipset. I believe that is the same chipset used in the Sonic Impact. What other parts Vinnie mods or changes, I do not know.

I have found a fair amount of difference in amps when wire or connectors are different. Of course the room and speakers will make more of a difference. The higher current capability of the battery might have a bit of an effect on the sound.

Doug, the Tripath chips just do not put out much power in 16 ohms. You might be better off with a matching transformer or a transformer coupled tube section for those speakers.

There have only been one pair of mono-blocks and on stereo amp built. These are for now custom built amps. If there is enough interest, with cash up front

, I may end up building some more.

Right now I am fairly busy finishing up the cables to be used at CES for VMPS, getting the last of the parts for all the Panny receiver mods, finalizing the mods for the JVC receiver and Teac amps, and building cables for customers.

Throw in the holidays and a hockey tournament. I am not sure when and if a "shoot-out" of the two Tripath amps would ever take place.

Dmason · « **Reply #13 on:** 28 Dec 2004, 09:13 pm »

It remains to be seen whether there would be additional power from the mono design. Of that I am not convinced. Maybe more current, though the battery is well capable of providing plenty of current, and maybe a better stereo perspective, although the stereo with this design is pretty much over the top, as others I am sure would agree; particularly when using wide range singles. Having said that, mono amps are always a nice way to go...

TheChairGuy · « **Reply #14 on:** 28 Dec 2004, 10:24 pm »

Quote from: Wayne1

I have found a fair amount of difference in amps when wire or connectors are different. Of course the room and speakers will make more of a difference. The higher current capability of the battery might have a bit of an effect on the sound

Wayne, I noticed you specify a much higher storage capacity SLA for your Tripath project than Vinnies...4.4 vs. 1.3 aH. Would not your larger storage SLA have greater and deeper long and short term capability (dynamic peaks) and, thus, affect sound most positively?

I use a 7 aH SLA with the (unmodded) Sonic Impact and am shocked how dynamic and relatively clear it is (for the money) on my Vandy's. I didn't know if it was solely because of the SLA in general, or because I use a rather oversized SLA with it.

Other than runtime, why did you choose a 4.4aH SLA over something smaller and lighter?

Wayne1 · « **Reply #15 on:** 1 Jan 2005, 10:29 pm »

I have noticed an improvement in sonics with higher current batteries when first working with the Tripath eval boards. The major reason for the 4.4 Ah battery was that the the largest battery I could find that would fit inside the chassis I was going to use.

The Tripath evaluation board does have a limit of about 4 amps for the main power inlet line. The output filter chokes also have a limit of 4 amps.

Because of all of those factors, I didn't see any advantage to going to anything larger than the 4.4 Ah battery. The particular battery I used is fairly common. It is used mostly in home burglar alarm systems. Availability should be very good for some years to come. It is very easy for the owner to replace the battery in this amp.

futuresng · « **Reply #16 on:** 2 Jan 2005, 05:11 pm »

Hi all, im new to this forum and have spent the last 2 days scouring all of your posts and am hoping to receive some clarification and advice. I listen to 80/20 HT and audio and am having delivered in 2 days a new 5.1 system from av123.com( rocket 750's system) on Wed. (currently have an HDTV panny CT 34 wx53) I am looking for help in digital receiver selection.

I have given up trying to find the XR45 so of the remaining digital receivers which would you recommend for a new system?

Humble attempt at summation of posts to date: Of the available digi receivers the xr 50 appears to lack power and is built really as an upgrade to the less powerful xr25 predessesor. Also it appears many users complained of a hum from this unit. So users waited for the XR 70 as this was to be the upgrade to the more powerful xr45 model. Users received the 70's and reviewed the components and seemed less than pleased. (THen the posts stopped) The JVC f10 appears to be well regarded from the posters as a 2 channel receiver but seems to lack in the HT dept. Also, they say the F10 is good for analog and not digital ? i dont know what this means as far as implications for setting up for HT? (clarification appreciated....does this mean the sound from my HDTV wont be as clear or something? ) I am leaning to the F10 and await your advice...

Wayne1 · « **Reply #17 on:** 2 Jan 2005, 05:55 pm »

All of the Panny receivers are rated at the same power (100 watts per channel @ 6 ohms)

The SA-XR45 has a better designed power supply section(IMHO) than any of the other models.

The SA-XR50 is not an "upgrade" but a replacement for the SA-XR25 for a new model year. The fan is eliminated and the receiver now has A & B speaker switching for the main speakers. The power supply is about the same for both models. The output circuitry is the same for both models.

The SA-XR70 uses the same amp and power supply boards as the SA-XR50 but adds a HDMI input. That would be useful if you intend to use a Panasonic DVD-A player and wish to keep the audio and video signal all digital. It also allows you to "Bi-amp" in stereo mode by switching the rear channel amps to drive the main speaker "B" connections.

If you are planing to use the receiver for primarily digital input from a DVD/CD player for mostly HT use, the SA-XR50 should be fine.

The "hum" some users report may be from cable TV grounding issues or noise generated by the switching power supply picked up by unshielded interconnect cables. I have run all of the Panasonic receivers in my office system and never had "hum" problems.

The comments about analog vs digital refers to the input selection. If you plan to use the single coaxial or optical digital output from you DVD/CD plater and cable/sat. set top box, the Panasonic receivers will keep that signal entirely in the digital domain. For HT useage, I feel this tends to sound quite a bit better.

The JVC receivers employ digital to analog processing which adds an extra step and might degrade the sonics slightly. The JVC receivers are reported to sound more "natural" with analog inputs, like a turntable or SACD player.

I do feel that any of these receivers sonics can be improved by upgrading internal parts and connectors. But I am in business to provide those services

futuresng · « **Reply #18 on:** 2 Jan 2005, 06:14 pm »

Funny but i pulled up your website to see if you sold modified xr45's but you are not open on sun ! (Only thing people agree on is that modification of digi's offers big benefits)

Ok sounds like its between the xr 50 or 70 !

Wondering if anyone knows if i would receive a benefit of the HDMI link fromthe XR 70 with my current comcast cable HD box linking to my panny tv? (concern is that my panny HDTV is 2 yrs old and says in the spec's listed in the link below that it has a DVI link not neccesarily HDMI) So does that mean that to get the XR 70 with HDMI would be overkill and i am better off with the xr 50?

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?storeId=11251&catalogId=11005&itemId=64756&catGroupId=11263&modelNo=CT-34WX53&surfModel=CT-34WX53

thanks...

Wayne1 · « **Reply #19 on:** 2 Jan 2005, 06:53 pm »

I do not believe the Motorla boxes that Comcast use have HDMI output.

At least the one I have only has DVI. I run the DVI cable straight to my RPTV. I use the coaxial digital output for audio.

The HDMI feature was added to the SA-XR70 so you could use their DVD-97S player with just one cable.

From the Panasonic website :"One Cable Carries High-Quality Digital Audio and Video
If you have even a moderately complicated home theater setup, you probably have a pile of tangled cables on the floor behind it. Imagine replacing all those cables with a single cable that carries both digital video and audio at the same time. With the new HDMI standard, that's exactly what you get. HDMI carries high-quality digital video and audio over the same thin cable, allowing you to run one cable from your DVD player to an HDMI-compatible TV or home theater receiver. "

There may not be any benefit from grouping both the audio and video digital signals together, aside from getting rid of a an extra cable. There has been a post by Jon Risch suggesting that the HDMI interface may actually degrade the signals.

If your main use is for cable HDTV, the SAXR50 would be fine. If you do not own or plan to own the Panasonic DVD-97s player, there is no need for the HDMI interface.

I do not sell any modded items. I provide the service that mods them, but I do not sell the hardware.