you seem to have mind-reading abilities
violins, cellos, double basses sounded just like that. and that is different from the ones I heard from the local philharmonic orchestra, which sounded like being made of wood.please, stop reading my mind, because I'm going to a concert and I'll likely be checking out the girls a bit.
though, I disagree with the glare, no glare with the UCDs.
did that in the past, not much change. in fact, I'd almost say I'd pe hard pressed to ABX that.
Unfortunately it does leave a possibility that the reason you don't like the UcD is that it is not like the AR - either because the UcD is bad, or because the AR is "good".
Did not like the steel top and bottom covers so
From my Galaxy chassis kit I ended up only using the side extrusions. I replaced the front, back, top and bottom with custom cut panels from Schaefer Home- Schaeffer AG - Frontplatten, Front Panels, Faces Avant
Thick aluminium panels have a lot less resonance than steel. I posted my build at audiocircle Show Us Your Core-NCore!
From my Galaxy chassis kit I ended up only using the side extrusions. I replaced the front, back, top and bottom with custom cut panels from Schaefer Home- Schaeffer AG - Frontplatten, Front Panels, Faces Avant
Thick aluminium panels have a lot less resonance than steel. I posted my build at audiocircle Show Us Your Core-NCore!
Should sound still fine. However alu is considered better in certain ways as you mention, and if you ordered and payed for something -that is what you should receive.
BTW, most hifi is stuffed in cheap magnetic steel place chassis. Its only the more expensive audiophile gear that typically (but not always) is built in alu boxes
I have already sent some angry mails to the french company. Had to send some angry mails before they sent me 10mm alu front as i ordered and paid for. Let see if they send me the right top/bottom also since as you say i ordered and paid for that.
Ok, so i can assemble the amp then and see how it works and if/when i get the alu top/bottom i change. Been a long journey regaring my build of these NC400, still not at goal but now not to far away.
Is your amp microphonic ?
The only difference between alu and steel is a little less distortion due to electromagnetic induced fields: Just wire your amp for the cables stay > 2cm from the chassis walls.
No measurements but not taking any chances ;-)
I have a bugbear about micro phonics, and ringing , more relevant for analog amps, but when we are chasing the last remnants of noise and distortion . . .
I am a big user of Herbie's vibration control
I have a bugbear about micro phonics, and ringing , more relevant for analog amps, but when we are chasing the last remnants of noise and distortion . . .
I am a big user of Herbie's vibration control
There is hundreds of 'real' things you can improve before asking-you this kind of questions with solid state circuits...when it is impossible to measure any distortion changes produced by accelerations 1000 times higher than the ones produced by any acoustic level you can afford.
If you see something, hitting your boards with a tool, time to look for the poor weldings or defective components.
All those middle aged and blind audiophile black magic just bores-me.
Like Class D = digital = plastic.
It is boring, because it has no sense, is not correlated by any scientific evidence, by no measurement or *serious* listening experience, (on the contrary) and came back endless like the sea snake.
mr_push_pull, time for you to look at the defective part of your UCD system: enclosures (highlighted by high slew-rate ?) , HF parasitic components from your preamp, or any faillure in your UCD amps/PSU.
There is NO special sound signature to be identified from 'good' Class D amps. comparing to linear class A ones.
My Herbie's Tenderfoot foot story, is that I could hear a difference when my ZP-80 which was only feeding SPDIF to my DAC sounded better when sitting on Herbie's Tenderfeet ! I have no explanation whatever, but hey if I think it sounds better, what the heck
enclosure and slew rate? not sure what you mean. TBH I'd rather try a good NCORE implementation rather than trying to improve the UCD amp. I'm sure everyone agrees that the NCORE is indeed better. good enough for me? have no idea but I hope I'll get to hear it one day. I'd still take class D any day if it sounds good enough.
to robbby, I remember you having some noise issues, were they fixed? when switching to my new amp which has earthed ground I experienced ground loop issues (noise) because the DAC has earthed ground too. easily fixed with a cheater plug.
of course, the source of the noise itself can be either the DAC or the amp. one of them may act as a noise receiver.
in my case it was a cheap replacement SMPS for my laptop.
of course, the source of the noise itself can be either the DAC or the amp. one of them may act as a noise receiver.
in my case it was a cheap replacement SMPS for my laptop.
You perfectly summed up my mind.
A fast amp with high damping factor can reveal or highliht defects in sources or traducers that an average one other will not. My home system highlight every defect in my own mixages i was not able to hear in the recording studios where i made them.mr_push_pull said:
About Class D amp, i prefer my analog amp (1000V/µs of slew rate, ~10Mhz of bandwidth) in the treeble. But the difference is not 'obvious', and the class D amps i had compared to it were not so different in presentation or signature. I mean my analog amp don't worth the complexity and price (Big power supply) for the difference. I mean, there is nothing 'special' or 'digital' in Class D amps (witch are 100% analog). The only issue is the limited bandwidth due to the switching frequency network filter, and their inductances distortions (mostly pair ones, and not different from output tube trasfo's ones). Those distortions are addressed in a clever way by the Ncores, as their are included in the feedback loop. Now, with the progress that technology brings each year in commutation's speed of power mosfets, we will have better and better class D amps, and i believe this is definitively the future of amplification.
The highest the switching frequency, the lowest is the filter's slope requisite, and less the impact on the group delay of the reproduced bandwidth.
It is a little like DAC oversampling.
There is obiously a VERY bad high frequency response. I cannot imagine the phase response curve !
Most of hifi soft dome tweeters just produce distortion or some kind of 'modulated noise' instead of real dynamic and details. Reducing them by a high pass filter can improve a system of this kind and give a more natural musical response ?
I use a spherical horn for medium/trebles. It cut around 16KHz. All my attempts to add a tweeter gave disappointing results: Lose of coherency, excessive and unnatural trebles etc.
Well, it is easier to add an high pass filter than to improve a slow amp producing IM because its lack of open loop bandwidth ?
I use a spherical horn for medium/trebles. It cut around 16KHz. All my attempts to add a tweeter gave disappointing results: Lose of coherency, excessive and unnatural trebles etc.
Well, it is easier to add an high pass filter than to improve a slow amp producing IM because its lack of open loop bandwidth ?
I found going back to ucd after ncore there was certainly a level of 'realism' missing in my opinion.
Had to do this once or twice when changing something inside my ncore, I built a ucd180 biamp amplifier before the ncore came out.
if I were to sum up the differences:
- (much) more real (lower) bass, (much) more highs
- much better transients
- cellos, violins etc turned from plastic to wood
- microdynamics: relatively small differences in loudness much more identifiable
- more *real* details, instruments emerging which I've never been aware of
- overall sensation of enjoyment, I listen more albums from start to finish because I like the sound AND the music more
- Status
- Not open for further replies.