Yes, it seems as cOz is working on it. See this thread: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/vendors-bazaar/205757-hypex-ncore-chassis-coz.html
found this on the Hypex website. it's worth reading IMO: http://www.hypex.nl/docs/papers/AES123BP.pdf
Audio Catalog how about a AL-299B case for the ncore monobloc of course, seems good value
Last edited:
Thanks Earflappin 
Re NOS DAC's. When you build a classical R2R DAC, running it at low sampling rates will reduce the energy contributed by glitches and hence produce clearly lower distortion. But note that we're talking about reducing a known drawback of R2R DACs, not making something better than alternative technologies that do not suffer glitches (i.e. sigmadelta).
There's something more important going on though. NOS DAC's cause a 2dB response droop at 20kHz (a sin(x)/x function). A friend of mine who's a mastering engineer once got very much hooked on an Altmann DAC. I explained to him how he could simulate the sin(x)/x droop using his editing software. He afterwards confirmed that indeed, a "normal" DAC with the simulated droop indeed recreated the euphonic "magic" of the NOS DAC exactly. He's now using a well engineered normal DAC again (a Bricasti, very much worth checking out) and said he might use the "NOS simulator" as a mastering trick occasionally.
In other words, NOS is just a way of introducing a euphonic frequency response aberration. All the philosophies intended to imply that somehow NOS does something "better" than a properly filtered converter is poppycock.
What would be the Ncore of DAC's? No idea. I have some serious plans to dive into a PWM based DAC, consisting of a modulator like the one described in http://www.hypex.nl/docs/papers/AES120BP.pdf and using a FIR type DAC for improved HF jitter tolerance. Although I'm aiming for much higher measured performance than even the ESS chips, I think that one of those or some other decent chip with a smartly designed I/V is not to be sneezed at. I'm halfway through the design of an AD1955 based board with a very fancy I/V (loads of feedback, as you can imagine), I have high hopes for it.
Re NOS DAC's. When you build a classical R2R DAC, running it at low sampling rates will reduce the energy contributed by glitches and hence produce clearly lower distortion. But note that we're talking about reducing a known drawback of R2R DACs, not making something better than alternative technologies that do not suffer glitches (i.e. sigmadelta).
There's something more important going on though. NOS DAC's cause a 2dB response droop at 20kHz (a sin(x)/x function). A friend of mine who's a mastering engineer once got very much hooked on an Altmann DAC. I explained to him how he could simulate the sin(x)/x droop using his editing software. He afterwards confirmed that indeed, a "normal" DAC with the simulated droop indeed recreated the euphonic "magic" of the NOS DAC exactly. He's now using a well engineered normal DAC again (a Bricasti, very much worth checking out) and said he might use the "NOS simulator" as a mastering trick occasionally.
In other words, NOS is just a way of introducing a euphonic frequency response aberration. All the philosophies intended to imply that somehow NOS does something "better" than a properly filtered converter is poppycock.
What would be the Ncore of DAC's? No idea. I have some serious plans to dive into a PWM based DAC, consisting of a modulator like the one described in http://www.hypex.nl/docs/papers/AES120BP.pdf and using a FIR type DAC for improved HF jitter tolerance. Although I'm aiming for much higher measured performance than even the ESS chips, I think that one of those or some other decent chip with a smartly designed I/V is not to be sneezed at. I'm halfway through the design of an AD1955 based board with a very fancy I/V (loads of feedback, as you can imagine), I have high hopes for it.
@Earflappin,
I'd love to hear any A/B comparisons of the nCore with your OTL. I have an Atma-Sphere S30 that I have loved but is a bit underpowered for my new speakers (SP Tech Minis, also a waveguide but around 87dB efficient).
Also, I grabbed a Class D Audio CDA-254 to tide me over until the next batch of nCores are released. Does it look like I'd be able to use the Class D power supply with the nCore modules pretty easily? Would be great to be able to save some cash on the PSU, at least for now.
I'd love to hear any A/B comparisons of the nCore with your OTL. I have an Atma-Sphere S30 that I have loved but is a bit underpowered for my new speakers (SP Tech Minis, also a waveguide but around 87dB efficient).
Also, I grabbed a Class D Audio CDA-254 to tide me over until the next batch of nCores are released. Does it look like I'd be able to use the Class D power supply with the nCore modules pretty easily? Would be great to be able to save some cash on the PSU, at least for now.
If you are tight on money I think you would be best to purchase one PS and use two nCores from it rather then use a PS that isn't designed for the nCores.
Mea culpa, point well taken...I apologize for mentioning a 6moons "review", which usually contain so much useless verbiage they are pain-inducing to read, giving new meaning to the term "off-topic" (I estimate about 60% of any review could/should be tossed).
That said, enjoyed the brief 6moons Hypex article with images of the Hypex team and facility in the Netherlands, home of my father's ancestors. Would love to see images of a sound-room frequented by any of the design team, preferred speakers, etc.
Ordering three Ncore (for pure analog Trinaural Processor) + suitable Hypex PS as soon as Bruno specifies ideal PS and I select suitable chassis.
From the brief Hypex user notes I've read I suspect I'll prefer Hypex over my Dayton sub amp/xo. After completing the 3-ch Ncore I'll A-B two channels powering four distributed subs vs. the Dayton.
Ummh... How about applying that urge to the DAC part of the DLPC?
Yes , and get it on the market.......
Regards Gerhard
That's too easy explained IMHO.
I never felt attracted by NOS dacs, not just because of poor technical performance (the -2dB drop at 20 kHz, and the "ugly" looking waveforms), but also based on what I heard (mostly based on Philips TDA 1541 or 1543).
But, weeks ago, I had the opportunity to listen to the aforementioned very positively reviewed NOS dac in my own system, not just occasionally, but during some six weeks.
My own "reference" is an AD1955 based dac.
From just a listeners perspective I liked the NOS dac a lot, and not just me but actually everybody who listened, and know my system, confirmed that the NOS dac gave more insight into the music; it did some things better than my own dac; especially transparency, dynamics, and the "pace and rythm" thing were pretty much better subjectively than what I had until then.
Should I reject the NOS dac because of it's poorer measurements, or just lean back and enjoy the better sound?
I choose the second option.
This dac does not add euphonic aberrations from what I hear, and I do not notice the HF roll off; on the contrary: I never heard the character of instruments reproduced more faithfully (being an amateur classical musician and recording engineer myself my real reference is life music so I pretend to know the characters of instruments pretty well).
Actually I am not so much interested in "why to my ears it does better" than any over- or upsampling dac I heard as long as a well implemented NOS application sounds the way it does.
Helloa every1....
What about this one from IKEA - stainless teel 12 cm dia/13,5 cm height!
Dress it with something to see through and with isolation on the bottom. Two pieces bolted together and one square for the PSU - or the PSU in 1 alone standing up/down.
A very FRUGAL solution and with some small adjustment/building can be really nice.
In Norway it costs about 39,- Norwegian kroner(that`s around 6 dollar).
Always someting that can be used - if one keep looking!
Best
Olav
Attachments
@pieter, If you want to be serious about audio you have to get over the "better / worse" way of thinking about sound. If you want to enjoy what the artists are putting on a disc for you you have to evaluate the equipment on whether the output signal sounds like the input signal, not whether on a specific collection of music it sounds pleasant, because that just gets you running in circles.
This is the type of comment that makes me a Hypex believer, even after having heard only one (known) Hypex component (Channel Island Audio 200W monobloc).
I think it is. There are different grades of stainless (304 & 316 to name two of them) and some of them will stain in a dishwasher with the caustic detergent they use
But I do like the imaginative use of alternative objects. I have in the past mounted a power amp in a biscuit/storage tin and a mini itx pc in a cut-down wooden bread bin
- Status
- Not open for further replies.