Oh dear
Stefanoo you really are embarrassing yourself here.
Take the Revel Ultima Studio 2 @ $16,000
Revel Ultima Studio2 loudspeaker | Stereophile.com
And the KEF Reference 201/2 @ $6000
KEF Reference 201/2 loudspeaker Specifications | Stereophile.com
Both of them are three way, both of them use very high quality drive units, both of them are finished well and both are engineered to a very high standard.
Neither one is better then the other, just because it costs more. The KEF is cheaper mainly because it is a smaller loudspeaker, this doesn't mean it sounds worse then the Revel. They will no doubt sound different, but as Buzzforb said, which you prefer will be down to personal tastes and your listening room.
You are hopeless sorry! You are comparing apple with oranges.
A bookshelf speaker is obviously going to cost less than a full range but yet retaining the same quality and here we can debate whether a full range speaker would be better or not.
But you are saying that the 16k full range can be replaced by a 5k full range and gets even worse if compared to the 25k flagship 800signature!!
The Cambridge audio will NOT match the ML , again I suggest you price out your dream amp , then factor in what's necessary to get it to market , you can call it the 5th element, science @work ...
Now who would pay 15k for it , I think Buzz would be the first to say its over priced and he could build it for less ...
Over here you can get the CA part for 1200 British pounds. The Levinson amplifier however costs, 7000. You can almost buy 6 CAs for the one Levinson.
The oligarchs have to get theirs and of course the socialist , you hi-fi imperialist dog ...
I'd rather have the KEF or Revel speakers over the B&Ws though, providing I can add a few subs to the mix. The B&W would be fine though if I could redesign the xover to suit my needs.
You say I'm hopeless. I quantify a statement by comparing two loudspeakers that cost significantly different amounts from one another, giving examples as I go. You were the one however who blithely said
And then when I mention two high quality loudspeakers at two different price points you start saying, but I didn't mean...
No, I get it. All your talking about is paying a ridiculously amount of money for a Strad, because it's a Strad, it doesn't matter if it plays or sounds worse, it's a Strad so I must buy it, it just has to be better etc. It's like buying a T shirt from M&S for $10 and then going next door and finding the same T shirt there, except now it has a Nike logo on it and it costs $50. All you're doing Stefanoo is making my point for me.
I'd like to see you pick them apart in a well controlled blind listening test. But that aside, I never said that the CA would beat the ML, just that they are similar in whats inside, yet at grossly different price points. If you purchased two CA units you'd have way more in parts then if you purchased one ML. Ergo the ML isn't giving you any value for money. The ML should cost more then the CA, it is built better, it does have two transformers etc The point is that the price should reflect that and cost say twice as much as the CA part, not 6 times.
Last edited:
Stefanoo, all i have left to say is that you can build some variations of the X amps from info currently on this forum. I cant say they are exact clones, but in reality come pretty close. If you are as smart as you say you are and use those ears of yours, you can twealk the sound to your liking. This assunes you can build amps and have distortion measurement equipment. If you would like, i can give you a quote on the parts as well as a custom machined case for it all. Should come in at significantly less than what you are looking at. Otherwise, buy the PassLabs amps and just listen to them. Please dont tear one apart. BtW, could you build an x250 based on what you see in your case? You do have everything right there, correct. Would be a cool experiment. You could see if you can match or even best its performance. Once again, the info is out there.
I understand what you are saying. My intention is not to clone the X250 as I already own and no need to clone a piece of equipment.
My goal is to make a power amp using crumbs and ideas and design something that conceptually satisfies me.
I could of course build an X250 very easily having the original but it wouldn't be any fun.
I will fully follow your advice and not get another X250 and tear it apart.
Just as a curiousity, do you own a metal shop? I would really consider getting a quote for a metal case. You have CNCs or you know where I could go to get it done at a good price?
Also, what do you mean a quote for parts? Custom transformer?
Ask EUVL this question?
I already know the answer because I have the heatsinks, but ask him anyway.
Why ask EVUL? ahahahah!!!
The answer is easy...it depends on your heasink, it is only 57.5W times which is 115W! Am I right?
My question is how many MosFet do you use and what is the bias?
Interesting Nelson's papers state that the bias should be around 2A per MOS.
If you are making a 200W power amp, it means that your rail will be around +/- 40V which makes a 80W dissipation on device! However shouldn't be the power dissipation per device a rule of thumb of about 27-30W?
The answer is easy...it depends on your heasink, it is only 57.5W times which is 115W! Am I right?
My question is how many MosFet do you use and what is the bias?
Interesting Nelson's papers state that the bias should be around 2A per MOS.
If you are making a 200W power amp, it means that your rail will be around +/- 40V which makes a 80W dissipation on device! However shouldn't be the power dissipation per device a rule of thumb of about 27-30W?
To keep things simple I think you would be very happy running a balanced BA3 front end connected to a BA2 output stage.
This amp will be somewhere between the XA.5 and his newest amps but without the additional single ended bias on the ouput stage. I am very confident you will like this amp.
Nelson has said previously that he would put his BA amps up against a K, L, or H. So they are very good amps in their own right.
This amp will be somewhere between the XA.5 and his newest amps but without the additional single ended bias on the ouput stage. I am very confident you will like this amp.
Nelson has said previously that he would put his BA amps up against a K, L, or H. So they are very good amps in their own right.
I see. However how do you get 2A bias on the FET without overexceeding a reasonable power rate?
Could you please link the information to these specific references?
Would the amplifier be completely DC offset?
Isn't BA3 a F5 without Feedback? I have been already using a similar topogy for preamplifier's design and it sounds extremely nice.
Yes basically it is an an F5 without feedback but do the balanced version of the BA3.
If you read right at the end of the BA2 pdf you can read what Nelson thinks of the amp.
In my opinion a balanced BA3 front end will be more musicaly interesting than the frontend of the BA2. Either way it will be a great amp
If you read right at the end of the BA2 pdf you can read what Nelson thinks of the amp.
In my opinion a balanced BA3 front end will be more musicaly interesting than the frontend of the BA2. Either way it will be a great amp
If you have 3 pairs (ie total of 6 mosfets) in parallel on each phase half of amp, then you have 2.5/3= 0.83A and 23V on each mosfet then you are dissipating 19W on each mosfet at idle
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.