Errr, a bit more sonic description perhaps?
Is it just more powerfull and so able to control better difficult loudspeakers under "loud listenting conditions, or does it have also any sonic differences at lower power levels?
How do the M and L modules compare in terms of musicality, bass, medium and treble?
I see that you power the Ls with a linear PS, right? Did you do so with the M modules?
Many thanks and sorry for the questions, but hence you posted kindly
Claude
Is it just more powerfull and so able to control better difficult loudspeakers under "loud listenting conditions, or does it have also any sonic differences at lower power levels?
How do the M and L modules compare in terms of musicality, bass, medium and treble?
I see that you power the Ls with a linear PS, right? Did you do so with the M modules?
Many thanks and sorry for the questions, but hence you posted kindly
Claude
Dear Lazy Cat,
Could you make a simple drawing on how to connect two M modules in order to make a balanced amp?
I can figure it out but I prefer to have expert advice
Cheers,
M.
These posts have the information, the second one has a link to the manual, there was a drawing of it in the 1.2 manual which disappeared in 1.4.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/vendors-bazaar/248996-first-one-mosfet-amplifier-module-294.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/vendors-bazaar/248996-first-one-mosfet-amplifier-module-293.html#post4711735
You can also use a THAT 1200 series chip to derive a single ended output from a differential input.
Hi Claude,
I have been very happy using the FO-M for many mths driving my old IM8300 Genesis speaker which is a beast to drive.
Recently I have build the FO-L and the first few hrs listening it sounds little different from the M module in the upper and mid section. It gives a more 3D and depth. But unfortunately due to my stupid mistake I have burned one of the module while tuning it. LC has been super helpful and help repaired my module. But due to busy work schedule I only find time to come back to this last mth.
I have since put together the L amp again and ran it for about 3weeks 8hrs a day. Both build is based on LC recommendation using the one Hypex PSU to one FO-M/L module but in a single chassis. This time I've put 2 120mm silent computer fan blowing at the heatsink and keep it happy only at 34degree while playing. The lowest noise fan I've found is from Coolermaster model Silencio FP120 only 11dbA.
Comparing the 2 amp, I find that the FO-L gives u a little more 3D presence and depth than the FO-M with no loss any of those good points that FO-M has like dynamic. transparency, micro details. The sound delivery is even more calm and stress free against the already good FO-M at high listening level and heavy materials. Maybe the bigger psu helps I think.
Just my view of course.
cheers
ck
I have been very happy using the FO-M for many mths driving my old IM8300 Genesis speaker which is a beast to drive.
Recently I have build the FO-L and the first few hrs listening it sounds little different from the M module in the upper and mid section. It gives a more 3D and depth. But unfortunately due to my stupid mistake I have burned one of the module while tuning it. LC has been super helpful and help repaired my module. But due to busy work schedule I only find time to come back to this last mth.
I have since put together the L amp again and ran it for about 3weeks 8hrs a day. Both build is based on LC recommendation using the one Hypex PSU to one FO-M/L module but in a single chassis. This time I've put 2 120mm silent computer fan blowing at the heatsink and keep it happy only at 34degree while playing. The lowest noise fan I've found is from Coolermaster model Silencio FP120 only 11dbA.
Comparing the 2 amp, I find that the FO-L gives u a little more 3D presence and depth than the FO-M with no loss any of those good points that FO-M has like dynamic. transparency, micro details. The sound delivery is even more calm and stress free against the already good FO-M at high listening level and heavy materials. Maybe the bigger psu helps I think.
Just my view of course.
cheers
ck
Errr, a bit more sonic description perhaps?
Is it just more powerfull and so able to control better difficult loudspeakers under "loud listenting conditions, or does it have also any sonic differences at lower power levels?
How do the M and L modules compare in terms of musicality, bass, medium and treble?
I see that you power the Ls with a linear PS, right? Did you do so with the M modules?
Many thanks and sorry for the questions, but hence you posted kindly
Claude
While at High End Munich you are all invited to visit us too, see you in Munich.
Attachments
I'll visit exhibitors in Marriot, see you.
Anyone interested in FO L sound, now is the time to come and evaluate:
"During the time of HIGH END 2017, on Friday, May the 19th and Saturday, May the 20th
the demonstration of our complete Setup of UBIQ AUDIO products will take place at
Sheraton Munich Arabellapark Hotel, Arabellastrasse 5, Munich,
Conference centre, Room Gartner."
L.C.
It's been a long time since I posted something on this thread but I was waiting until I completed my updated build with the added extra capacitors. Now the build is complete and I will post pictures later on but I have added an extra 10000uF high ripple low ESR cap per rail, added an SSR speaker protection and paralleled just a tiny resistor on the Cresnet SMPS to be able to start the SMPS with all that capacitance in the way (also using a softstart).
Prior to this setup, the FO M was playing quite nicely but the bass was lacking on my Troels Gravesen ATS-4 speakers, thus putting an emphasis on the mids and it was as if there was too much being done on the medium high to high, basically it was off balance. I know the FO has very low impedance and a passive preamp is not recommended and I did notice that, then I used the DCB1 instead of my LDR, which has a gain of 1 but at least it is active. This helped make the bass show up a little more and added signs of dynamics in the mix but still was far from what I wanted.
So with the completed setup, I now have 16000uF per rail of all low ESR caps. The difference is quite remarkable to say the least. Still using the DCB1 for now, the bass is very adequate, fast and punchy. Medium is very rich and detailed and highs are very nice without being harsh. To sum it all, it is now a very balanced amplifier with good soundstage and fun to listen to.
Thanks
Do
Prior to this setup, the FO M was playing quite nicely but the bass was lacking on my Troels Gravesen ATS-4 speakers, thus putting an emphasis on the mids and it was as if there was too much being done on the medium high to high, basically it was off balance. I know the FO has very low impedance and a passive preamp is not recommended and I did notice that, then I used the DCB1 instead of my LDR, which has a gain of 1 but at least it is active. This helped make the bass show up a little more and added signs of dynamics in the mix but still was far from what I wanted.
So with the completed setup, I now have 16000uF per rail of all low ESR caps. The difference is quite remarkable to say the least. Still using the DCB1 for now, the bass is very adequate, fast and punchy. Medium is very rich and detailed and highs are very nice without being harsh. To sum it all, it is now a very balanced amplifier with good soundstage and fun to listen to.
Thanks
Do