[JDUBS]

Jim

are you using a deqx or other to drive the yorks actively ?
if so , do you drive each driver active ?

Yes, I actively triamp with the DEQX.  One stereo amp per pair of drivers (or set of 3x paralelled drivers / per speaker in the case of the midrange).  I'm running a Tube Audio Lab 45 tube amp into an F4 for the tweeters, the UCD180 for the midrange, and a Crown K2 for the woofers.  I really like the results.

-Jim

[hum4god]

Hi Jim

after your suggestion i am reconsidering triamping again, the problem is , i actually have a four way system .
the danley sm60f is three way , and from 50hz down i use a sub.
how would you suggest to configure w/ the deqx if i want to triamp the sm60 and have a mono sub ?

the other option is,  to leave the passive crossover of the coax(between tweet and midrange)  of the sm60f and triamp , sub , midwoofer , coax .

any other idea ?

[ooheadsoo]

I have only heard the nuforce and the Digital Amp Company 4800A, and am very pleased with the 4800A.  No regrets on that purchase.  I think you will find it to meet your criteria, and the Cherries are built to a higher standard.

[roymail]

I can absolutely assure you that in no way was the kit [Class D Audio] comparable to the Cherry. ...mfsoa

... especially the price tag.  No doubt the DAC 4800A, Cherry Jr, and Cherry are excellent Class D performers, and I'd love to own any of them.  However, being retired and on a fixed income has it's limitations.

Many have found the Class D Audio amps to also be excellent performers at a more affordable price point.  Personally, I'm looking forward to owning the SDS-254. 

[mfsoa]

I know that many are happy with their ClassD kits, that they were fun to build and suit the user's needs very well 

But since the OP was hunting in the Spectron, Nuforce etc range I wanted to add the DAC amps (yeah, unfortunate acronym  ) into the mix.

-Mike

[roymail]

But since the OP was hunting in the Spectron, Nuforce etc range I wanted to add the DAC amps (yeah, unfortunate acronym  ) into the mix.
-Mike

And, you should because the DAC amps certainly belong in that grouping.  In fact, one of those DAC amps would be my choice of all of them.  For someone able to spend those $$$, it's an excellent choice... no argument from me.  I'm just unable to afford gear in that price range right now.  And, this economy isn't helping any!

[JDUBS]

Hi Jim

after your suggestion i am reconsidering triamping again, the problem is , i actually have a four way system .
the danley sm60f is three way , and from 50hz down i use a sub.
how would you suggest to configure w/ the deqx if i want to triamp the sm60 and have a mono sub ?

the other option is,  to leave the passive crossover of the coax(between tweet and midrange)  of the sm60f and triamp , sub , midwoofer , coax .

any other idea ?

Good question.  Maybe split the output for the woofers from the DEQX with a 1 to 2 RCA splitter, 1 goes to the woofer amp and 1 goes to your sub amp?  This would mean that your woofers would only be low pass crossed.  Does your sub amp have gain and crossover controls?

-Jim

[ooheadsoo]

I don't know what resale is like right now, but I found my DAC4800A at a fairly reasonable price used, from an AC'er looking to upgrade to a Cherry.  Keep your eyes open, you never know.

[hum4god]

Good question.  Maybe split the output for the woofers from the DEQX with a 1 to 2 RCA splitter, 1 goes to the woofer amp and 1 goes to your sub amp?  This would mean that your woofers would only be low pass crossed.  Does your sub amp have gain and crossover controls?

-Jim

i thought of something like that , but danley recommends highpassing the woofers in the sm60f so i would need two passive xovers after the deqx , a highpass to the woofer and a low pass to the sub , and then also some form of attenuation to adjust levels .

that all seems to be very complicated .
i thought about using the passive xover in the sm60f between the mid and tweet , and using active crossover between the woofer and coax ,and between the woofer and sub.

the advantage would be that the passive crossover for the coax already exists in the sm60f .
i could just disconnect the woofer from passive xover and connect it directly to the amp being fed from active crossover deqx.

[JP78]

I'd vote for an iCE Power implementation. Over the past few years I've owned the Musician III, Bel Canto Ref 500s, and Acoustic Reality monoblocks; in various bi-amp configurations my favorites were the Acoustic Reality for the full-range (iCE power), Spectron for mid-high only duties, and the Bel Cantos weren't really my cup of tea.

I believe the W4S is also iCE driven, and it sounds like many of the above fellow AC'ers findings are similar.

Best,

[lonewolfny42]

Hello Malcolm....

Why not check with Tommy and see if he can set you up with an audition of his Cherry or Cherry + amps.....

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?action=profile;u=46610

They really are nice amps....good luck !

                     Chris

ps....Still enjoying the KR Audio amp that I bought from you....

[art]

I'd vote for an iCE Power implementation.

As a manufacturer, who has built products with both ICEpower, and Hypex, I would advise going with Hypex. Lots of reasons, but for someone who wants to futz with one, the ICEPower are not conducive to futzing. Removing parts from their PCBs is not fun. Hypex is more in-line with a DIY approach, whereas ICEpower is more of an industrial outfit. Besides, they don't sell to hobbyists.

Pat

[lowtech]

+6 for Hypex.  I use 6-channels of UcD modules driven by a DEQX to tri-amp my speakers.   

[AmpDesigner333]

Malcolm,

There is a DAC4800A for $900 start on Audiogon:
http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/auc.pl?ampsmult&1285384621

This is essentially the same as Cherry jr internally.  Solid package.

Thanks.

-Tommy

[hum4god]

+6 for Hypex.  I use 6-channels of UcD modules driven by a DEQX to tri-amp my speakers.   

Hi Lowtech

did you build the 6ch hypex yourself?

[newzooreview]

At an audio GTG yesterday we got to hear my new Cherry Plus vs the 250 wpc Wyred4sound (ICE) and the Cherry was the clear winner (an understatement if I believe the comments I heard from others) - much less electronic signature yet greater high frequency clarity. And this was on very efficient Tannoys - I would imagine that the Cherry w/ it's 1500 watt linear power supply would pull even further ahead given a tough load knowing the difficulties that even higher-power ICE amps (w/ switching power supplies) have been reported to have w/ such loads.

This is comparing apples and oranges and is somewhat disingenuous. The Cherry Plus is a $3600 amplifier and the ST-250 is the budget, entry level Wyred4Sound amplifier. It's $1000, and it has 10% higher idle noise, much lower input sensitivity (by more than a factor of 2), lower dynamic range, and much different damping factor than their other amps. For nearly 4 times the cost, the Cherry Plus should sound better or DAC is incompetent.

A real comparison would be a pair of the SX-1000 monoblocks against the Cherry Junior. A pair of the SX-1000s costs $2400 and the Cherry Junior costs $2000--someone shopping for amps would certainly be interested in whether a full monoblock setup offers any advantage over a two-channel amp in the same price range. Until such a comparison is reported, statements that DAC produces categorically better amplifiers than Wyred4Sound are meaningless.

I own an STI-1000, their integrated 500W per channel amplifier, and it is highly musical and fluid. There's nothing electronic or dry about it. It was clearly better overall than a tube hybrid amp and tube hybrid preamp setup that I just auditioned in my home, and those cost twice as much as the Wyred4Sound integrated. The separates had beefy linear power supplies and they were more resolving but at the expense of listening fatigue and a bleaching of timbre. The Wyred4Sound integrated has a wonderful ability to present music with excellent resolution, sound staging, bass control, and natural balance across the frequency range. The STI-1000 also reproduces the tone of instruments and voices more realistically than many other amps that I have heard. In this respect it sounds more like a good tube setup than solid state.

I'm upgrading to separates, the STP-SE preamplifier and the SX-1000 monoblocks referenced above. The in-home audition of the tube hybrid equipment did demonstrate that separates will make a difference, and the STP-SE is a big upgrade over the preamp section on the STI-1000. I think the Wyred4Sound equipment is some of the best available for the cost. The reviewers over at 6moons bought 3 STP-SE preamps among them, one of them replacing a $10,000 preamp.

[JDUBS]

i thought of something like that , but danley recommends highpassing the woofers in the sm60f so i would need two passive xovers after the deqx , a highpass to the woofer and a low pass to the sub , and then also some form of attenuation to adjust levels .

that all seems to be very complicated .
i thought about using the passive xover in the sm60f between the mid and tweet , and using active crossover between the woofer and coax ,and between the woofer and sub.

the advantage would be that the passive crossover for the coax already exists in the sm60f .
i could just disconnect the woofer from passive xover and connect it directly to the amp being fed from active crossover deqx.

Does your sub have a built-in amp?  If so, does it have a volume control?  No doubt its complex, but I feel like the effort would be worth it. 

-Jim

[lowtech]

Hi Lowtech

did you build the 6ch hypex yourself?

Yes, if you can call putting the pieces into a chassis and connecting them together.

[hum4god]

Does your sub have a built-in amp?  If so, does it have a volume control?  No doubt its complex, but I feel like the effort would be worth it. 

-Jim

Hi Jim

i am using a danley dts-10 which does not come with amp/xover/attenuation .
i also would have to find out what the xover freq. for the drivers in the sm60f are .
did you just go by the specs of the drivers and let the deqx configure the best suited xover freq. and slope ?

malcolm

[JDUBS]

Hi Jim

i am using a danley dts-10 which does not come with amp/xover/attenuation .
i also would have to find out what the xover freq. for the drivers in the sm60f are .
did you just go by the specs of the drivers and let the deqx configure the best suited xover freq. and slope ?

malcolm

malcolm, how about this: 

From the low frequency pair of outputs of the DEQX, a 1 to 2 RCA splitter, like this:

http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103638

One of the outputs from the RCA splitter goes to your SH60F amp with a pair of these on the inputs:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=266-270

The other pair of outputs should go to your subwoofer amp which you should be able to control the level and crossover frequency.  Make sense?

-Jim