Hypex UcD AS2.100 - Page 30

Matthijs_Hypex · 1st March 2011, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vathek

I'm not someone from Hypex, but I do own a pair of PSC2.400d and looked into this before I bought them.

The most obvious difference is that the PSC has "professional" connections (XLR for analog and AES/EBU for digital) whereas the AS has "consumer" connections (cinch for analog and s/pdif for digital). The PSC has a switching power supply, while the AS has a "traditional" power-transformer plus regulation power supply. Then the PSC lacks the third way in the crossover, that the AS offers. Last but not least, the PSC has better specs if you look at the datasheets, which might mean there are better converters used. But that's just speculation, someone from Hypex would have to clarify this.

Quite possible I missed something, but this is what came to mind..

Vathek mentioned almost all differences.
By dropping the sub-output of the AS2 we could use two DAC's in parallel, which explains the differences in the specs.
Indeed it is more for pro use. Therefore we also skipped the controls for idle and volume + remote control.
Last but not least the PSC2 has a clip- and thermal limiter.

Matthijs_Hypex · 1st March 2011, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vathek

But I also have a question for someone from Hypex. My two-way monitors powered by a PSC2.400d hiss quite noticeably. Now that was to some degree expected, after all they output about 200W into 8 ohm of a tweeter that's way above 100dB/W.

Now the strange thins is, that if I play a sound signal that's quieter than the noise floor of the speaker (yes, that's really quiet

), there is no hiss noticeable. But as soon as I stop the playback the hiss reappears as if there was a gate opened. This makes me think that the hiss is not only from the power amplifier, but also from circuit before (dithering noise?).

I hope I'm being clear, let me try again: The speakers hiss noticeably, but only when there's no audio signal present at the inputs. As soon as there's a signal (as faint as it may be) the hiss is gone, when playback is stopped, the hiss is back.

I can live with it, but it would certainly be a big improvement if this hiss could be avoided. Oh, I'm using the digital inputs btw, haven't tried analog (would have to get cables first). Any idea what this could be?

We will look into it.

ShinOBIWAN · 23rd March 2011, 02:16 PM

A couple of questions for Hypex:

When is the (long delayed) hi-end 2in 6out DPS board available?

Also how does this unit compare to the DEQX? You claim the other manufacturer's are using brute force FIR filters with pre echo and ringing problems and your method of using IIR with an FIR all pass is a more correct way of doing things but the DEQX, for me, is the reference for loudspeaker and room correction. The software seems far more developed than others including yours and the tech has been iteratively improved over the last 8-9 years since the initial release. It mature, proven and is trusted by professionals.

I'm always interested in new approaches but what I see here is just the next step up over the much cheaper miniDSP platform and not a challenger to the likes of the DEQX.

This may sound overly harsh and what you have is a great product but I've not seen anything in the last few years that can top the DEQX and primarily the power and flexibilty of its software. What I'd really like to see is something that finally furthers the art and supplants that box as the new state of the art.

Jussi · 30th March 2011, 12:02 PM

UcD AS2.100 and AS2.400. Are they up for a state of the art task? Honestly. Or is it better to use separated DSP and amps?

ShinOBIWAN · 30th March 2011, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jussi

UcD AS2.100 and AS2.400. Are they up for a state of the art task? Honestly. Or is it better to use separated DSP and amps?

Not really I guess. The plate amps are a turnkey solution but I still hold out hope for the upcoming 2in 6out DSP board. Just frustrates me in the 5 or 6 years I've been using DSP there's been nothing to better the DEQX. Seems like we took a huge leap forward and then have stood still since.

StigErik · 31st March 2011, 07:33 AM

I think that's why some of us still use PC-based solutions.... I actually learned that stuff from you ShinOBIWAN. Thanks a lot by the way.

PC-based is a little more hassle than a hardware box like the DEQX, but being a DIY-guy I like to play around with stuff....

goosewing · 31st March 2011, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinOBIWAN

Not really I guess. The plate amps are a turnkey solution but I still hold out hope for the upcoming 2in 6out DSP board. Just frustrates me in the 5 or 6 years I've been using DSP there's been nothing to better the DEQX. Seems like we took a huge leap forward and then have stood still since.

You may care to take a little look at the MiniDSP site. High(er) end 2x8 DSP has just appeared there.

Crafty · 31st March 2011, 02:38 PM

Slightly off topic but..

any comments on PC (acourate) route vs hardware Shin?

would be very interested in your comparisons as contemplating a pc based setup but it requires a lot of hardware and time to execute in the best possible way

ShinOBIWAN · 31st March 2011, 05:25 PM

PC is still good. But its not got a lead like it used to have a few years ago. For starters it takes a fair bit of effort to get it going and some sound cards aren't compatible with various programs. There's the problem of getting external sources decoded too, it can be done but its further hassle. Finally video and gaming requires another set of filters if you want maximum performance for music playback. All in all the PC route is worthwhile but be prepared to put some considerable effort in to achieve the best results. I grew wary of problems and effort the PC demanded and went over to the DEQX which is set and forget for all sources. The DEQX also sounds roughly equivalent to the best PC solution I had once its setup with similar care, I'd probably give a slight edge to the PC in terms of absolute sound quality but much depends on the converters and sound interface your using. The DEQX HDP3 is pretty solid here whereas PC's can have inadequate audio electronics even if the software and filters your running are great.

These more recent DSP boards and plate amps are a welcome addition and sit behind the DEQX in performance and flexibility but at a considerably reduced price. I'll be getting hands on with either the hypex or minidps(maybe both) in a project I'm about start so I'll post my thoughts about them.

Tiff_Needle · 25th April 2011, 11:39 AM

Sorry for the off-topic....

Matthijs,

You've stated that Hypex will realease a higher powered module than the PSC2.400, Model PSC2.700.

I would like to know what is the roadmap for this product?

It shall be based on UcD700 OEM, correct?

SMPS will be SMPS1200, otherwise if bridged you wouldn't get the full potential of the UcD700 modules?

Will you improve the sample rate that is used for the DSP section?

If you used a 96kHz/24bit signaling for DSP that Up-sampled lower resolution signals to 96kHz/24Bit and down-sample higher sample rates such as 192kHz/24Bit (I imagine using DSP at 192kHz besides being a technical problem it would be far more expensive) would e a great plus!

Is it possible for you to supply the PSC2.400 but with a SMPS1200?

31st March 2011, 07:33 AM	#296
StigErik diyAudio Member Join Date: Feb 2008	I think that's why some of us still use PC-based solutions.... I actually learned that stuff from you ShinOBIWAN. Thanks a lot by the way. PC-based is a little more hassle than a hardware box like the DEQX, but being a DIY-guy I like to play around with stuff.... __________________ dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles and dipoles

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FS : Hypex ST PSU	korben69	Swap Meet	1	2nd July 2010 11:46 AM
Question for those who have tried hypex smps with hypex modules	avian	Class D	12	3rd March 2009 09:30 AM
Hypex UcD 400.	ian walker	Swap Meet	3	14th January 2008 03:32 PM
Hypex UcD 180AD + signal wires, Power Supply ST, Hypex Transformer TR100A	c10h12n2	Swap Meet	7	7th July 2007 03:55 PM
FS: Hypex UcD 400/180AD, hypex toroid	Archmage	Swap Meet	4	14th November 2006 04:23 AM

New To Site?	Need Help?
Register to Participate Search Privacy Statement Contact Us	Frequently Asked Questions Did you forget your password? Mark Forums Read


	Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you. Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving

23rd March 2011, 02:16 PM	#293
ShinOBIWAN diyAudio Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: UK	A couple of questions for Hypex: When is the (long delayed) hi-end 2in 6out DPS board available? Also how does this unit compare to the DEQX? You claim the other manufacturer's are using brute force FIR filters with pre echo and ringing problems and your method of using IIR with an FIR all pass is a more correct way of doing things but the DEQX, for me, is the reference for loudspeaker and room correction. The software seems far more developed than others including yours and the tech has been iteratively improved over the last 8-9 years since the initial release. It mature, proven and is trusted by professionals. I'm always interested in new approaches but what I see here is just the next step up over the much cheaper miniDSP platform and not a challenger to the likes of the DEQX. This may sound overly harsh and what you have is a great product but I've not seen anything in the last few years that can top the DEQX and primarily the power and flexibilty of its software. What I'd really like to see is something that finally furthers the art and supplants that box as the new state of the art.

30th March 2011, 12:02 PM	#294
Jussi diyAudio Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Finland	UcD AS2.100 and AS2.400. Are they up for a state of the art task? Honestly. Or is it better to use separated DSP and amps?

31st March 2011, 02:38 PM	#298
Crafty diyAudio Member Join Date: Oct 2008	Slightly off topic but.. any comments on PC (acourate) route vs hardware Shin? would be very interested in your comparisons as contemplating a pc based setup but it requires a lot of hardware and time to execute in the best possible way

31st March 2011, 05:25 PM	#299
ShinOBIWAN diyAudio Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: UK	PC is still good. But its not got a lead like it used to have a few years ago. For starters it takes a fair bit of effort to get it going and some sound cards aren't compatible with various programs. There's the problem of getting external sources decoded too, it can be done but its further hassle. Finally video and gaming requires another set of filters if you want maximum performance for music playback. All in all the PC route is worthwhile but be prepared to put some considerable effort in to achieve the best results. I grew wary of problems and effort the PC demanded and went over to the DEQX which is set and forget for all sources. The DEQX also sounds roughly equivalent to the best PC solution I had once its setup with similar care, I'd probably give a slight edge to the PC in terms of absolute sound quality but much depends on the converters and sound interface your using. The DEQX HDP3 is pretty solid here whereas PC's can have inadequate audio electronics even if the software and filters your running are great. These more recent DSP boards and plate amps are a welcome addition and sit behind the DEQX in performance and flexibility but at a considerably reduced price. I'll be getting hands on with either the hypex or minidps(maybe both) in a project I'm about start so I'll post my thoughts about them.

25th April 2011, 11:39 AM	#300
Tiff_Needle diyAudio Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Montijo, Portugal	Sorry for the off-topic.... Matthijs, You've stated that Hypex will realease a higher powered module than the PSC2.400, Model PSC2.700. I would like to know what is the roadmap for this product? It shall be based on UcD700 OEM, correct? SMPS will be SMPS1200, otherwise if bridged you wouldn't get the full potential of the UcD700 modules? Will you improve the sample rate that is used for the DSP section? If you used a 96kHz/24bit signaling for DSP that Up-sampled lower resolution signals to 96kHz/24Bit and down-sample higher sample rates such as 192kHz/24Bit (I imagine using DSP at 192kHz besides being a technical problem it would be far more expensive) would e a great plus! Is it possible for you to supply the PSC2.400 but with a SMPS1200?