Hello,
This danish firm is just launching is V2 version of class D amp wich look very impressive.
NewClassD Front Page
Does somebody compare this brand to an another one?
The old version was compared here:
2008 - Class D Amplifier comparasion test
Have a good eastern day: David
This danish firm is just launching is V2 version of class D amp wich look very impressive.
NewClassD Front Page
Does somebody compare this brand to an another one?
The old version was compared here:
2008 - Class D Amplifier comparasion test
Have a good eastern day: David
Sure 2X100 vs Hypex
I have an early Hypex Ucd180 and my modified Sure 2X100 sounds much better.
Comparison chart
If you follow the link, they post a comparison chart with other amps including the Ucd180 which came in second in the listening tests. So, for the TK2050 amps to sound better than my Hypex, and all of my other AB amps for that matter, tells me that the Sure is a very good value and near the cutting edge in sonics which the original poster is asking about.
If you follow the link, they post a comparison chart with other amps including the Ucd180 which came in second in the listening tests. So, for the TK2050 amps to sound better than my Hypex, and all of my other AB amps for that matter, tells me that the Sure is a very good value and near the cutting edge in sonics which the original poster is asking about.
As you will also see. It's the old version that is compared in that link. The new version is much better, even better than your Sure amp.
Still in my mind doesn't beat a properly built Truepath with the newest FETs but comes damn close.
We're talking tiny nuances in the ultra high-end here. But on my simple Lowther and I suppose on all single driver setups, dynamic or otherwise, the Truepath is slightly better because of the extreme background information. The seemingless endless depth and width to the playing field, and the immidiately appearent feel-good style of the Truepath. You simply don't hear the difference other than on the Truepath you just want to hear the next track and the one after, while on the newclassd you want to hear the same one over and over the find the tiny details. It's a question of pure musicality versus extremely detail.
However, on a stripped Lyngdorf Steinway system they perform almost equally. So I'd say that with 1 or 2-way systems the Truepath is the clear winner, while on more complex systems like the Lyngdorf's the newclassd probably edge ahead slightly. Both are better than any class A or A/B amp I've ever heard though. Mark Levison, Krell and whatnot included.
Last edited:
I wonder how something with pre-filter feedback can be considered the best. Trebble output is uncontrolled, speaker dependent. Output impedance rises at 6dB/oct (thus damping falls at the same rate). Output filter non-linearity (and any cross-talk) is uncontrolled too.
On the other hand, when you feel good or excited about something new or just not tired, everything sounds better, more detailed. For example, I can get very good and very bad impressions about exactly the same system at different times of the day, that's why I have never trusted subjective reviews. You are evaluating many feelings not related to sound as much as the ones related to sound.
On the other hand, when you feel good or excited about something new or just not tired, everything sounds better, more detailed. For example, I can get very good and very bad impressions about exactly the same system at different times of the day, that's why I have never trusted subjective reviews. You are evaluating many feelings not related to sound as much as the ones related to sound.
Last edited:
Thanks Saturnus,
Reading your answer I can understand you heard both technology and that the musicality is on the truepath side.
It's interesting too to note that the price of truepath is quite lower than newclassd (more than 520 euros for a module pair...)...
If truepath like to work with fullrange drivers without notch filter it could be a good idea for my bahia tqwt powered with supravox 215 signature bicone drivers.
Have a good day: David
Reading your answer I can understand you heard both technology and that the musicality is on the truepath side.
It's interesting too to note that the price of truepath is quite lower than newclassd (more than 520 euros for a module pair...)...
If truepath like to work with fullrange drivers without notch filter it could be a good idea for my bahia tqwt powered with supravox 215 signature bicone drivers.
Have a good day: David
Eva
Hi Eva, just wanted to reply on your remarks about frequency rolloff, and uncontrolled treble response.
Our output filter is rolling off at around 200 kHz - 3dB at 8 Ohms, so the audible impact is not very significant. We then set the series resonance frequency of the output filter to have also 8 Ohms impedance at 200 kHz, meaning the dampened series resonance of the output filter will compensate the rolloff at 8 Ohms loads, to give a flat response to 250 kHz - 3 dB. This is the best response of any Class D amplifier i have seen.
At 4 Ohms things look different of course.
The flat response extends only to 160 KHz, but that's still far better than those Class D modules who feedback after the filter. In order to keep these types stable, the bandwidth is limited to 50 KHz for all impedances. So with NewClassD modules you still get 3 times more bandwidth, than the 'post filter feedback' modules. I think that makes it clear why the NCDX is better, and why the argument of controlled frequency response is correct in theory, but in practical irrelevant. Kind of like limiting the speed of your Porsche to 120 km/h. Pre filter feedback set's the speed of the amplifier free, so you can go 250 km/h, unless you drive on a dirt field.
If you really only believe in post filter feedback, no problem, you actually have that opition on the NCD and NCDX modules, simply move a jumper from 'PRE' to 'POST' and you have impedance flat response. NewClassD is also the only module to give that option to users.
(Similar option is also included on NCDX)
Although i have to admit i have never heard abourt anyone using post filter feedback, but that's because pre filter feedback sound more open.
I hope this puts the 'controlled frequency limitation' issue to rest once and for all
About
As you see we achieved THD figures of 0.0007% on a pre filter feedback, so the issue of inductor unlinearity
is clearly not a big problem. Due to delay in the output inductor, a the same amplifier with post filter feedback
actually gets higher THD which coresponds to higher non-linearity. So again in theory you might be right,
but in practical life, the output inductor non-linearity (of a well designed inductor) is irrelevant, because it's
far below audible limits.
Hi Eva, just wanted to reply on your remarks about frequency rolloff, and uncontrolled treble response.
Our output filter is rolling off at around 200 kHz - 3dB at 8 Ohms, so the audible impact is not very significant. We then set the series resonance frequency of the output filter to have also 8 Ohms impedance at 200 kHz, meaning the dampened series resonance of the output filter will compensate the rolloff at 8 Ohms loads, to give a flat response to 250 kHz - 3 dB. This is the best response of any Class D amplifier i have seen.
At 4 Ohms things look different of course.
The flat response extends only to 160 KHz, but that's still far better than those Class D modules who feedback after the filter. In order to keep these types stable, the bandwidth is limited to 50 KHz for all impedances. So with NewClassD modules you still get 3 times more bandwidth, than the 'post filter feedback' modules. I think that makes it clear why the NCDX is better, and why the argument of controlled frequency response is correct in theory, but in practical irrelevant. Kind of like limiting the speed of your Porsche to 120 km/h. Pre filter feedback set's the speed of the amplifier free, so you can go 250 km/h, unless you drive on a dirt field.
If you really only believe in post filter feedback, no problem, you actually have that opition on the NCD and NCDX modules, simply move a jumper from 'PRE' to 'POST' and you have impedance flat response. NewClassD is also the only module to give that option to users.
(Similar option is also included on NCDX)
Although i have to admit i have never heard abourt anyone using post filter feedback, but that's because pre filter feedback sound more open.
I hope this puts the 'controlled frequency limitation' issue to rest once and for all
About
As you see we achieved THD figures of 0.0007% on a pre filter feedback, so the issue of inductor unlinearity
is clearly not a big problem. Due to delay in the output inductor, a the same amplifier with post filter feedback
actually gets higher THD which coresponds to higher non-linearity. So again in theory you might be right,
but in practical life, the output inductor non-linearity (of a well designed inductor) is irrelevant, because it's
far below audible limits.
Last edited:
Hi Eva, just wanted to reply on your remarks about frequency rolloff, and uncontrolled treble response.
Our output filter is rolling off at around 200 kHz - 3dB at 8 Ohms, so the audible impact is not very significant. We then set the series resonance frequency of the output filter to have also 8 Ohms impedance at 200 kHz, meaning the dampened series resonance of the output filter will compensate the rolloff at 8 Ohms loads, to give a flat response to 250 kHz - 3 dB. This is the best response of any Class D amplifier i have seen.
At 4 Ohms things look different of course.
The flat response extends only to 160 KHz, but that's still far better than those Class D modules who feedback after the filter. In order to keep these types stable, the bandwidth is limited to 50 KHz for all impedances. So with NewClassD modules you still get 3 times more bandwidth, than the 'post filter feedback' modules. I think that makes it clear why the NCDX is better, and why the argument of controlled frequency response is correct in theory, but in practical irrelevant. Kind of like limiting the speed of your Porsche to 120 km/h. Pre filter feedback set's the speed of the amplifier free, so you can go 250 km/h, unless you drive on a dirt field.
If you really only believe in post filter feedback, no problem, you actually have that opition on the NCD and NCDX modules, simply move a jumper from 'PRE' to 'POST' and you have impedance flat response. NewClassD is also the only module to give that option to users.
(Similar option is also included on NCDX)
Although i have to admit i have never heard abourt anyone using post filter feedback, but that's because pre filter feedback sound more open.
I hope this puts the 'controlled frequency limitation' issue to rest once and for all
About
As you see we achieved THD figures of 0.0007% on a pre filter feedback, so the issue of inductor unlinearity
is clearly not a big problem. Due to delay in the output inductor, a the same amplifier with post filter feedback
actually gets higher THD which coresponds to higher non-linearity. So again in theory you might be right,
but in practical life, the output inductor non-linearity (of a well designed inductor) is irrelevant, because it's
far below audible limits.
Hi all,
I have two questions on the discussion "linear filter" / on the chart (thd Vs frequency).
what is the oscillation frequency of this class D amp?
with that PSU has been powering the amplifier to get this chart?
Regards
Very interesting results
But at which output power this measurement was done? What was used as a load? EDIT: found it myself: "...recorded at 1Wrms in 4 Ohms, and with feedback loop set to 'pre' (before output inductor)..."
Is it possible to get the same measurement at 50-100Wrms?
Last edited:
That looks impressive, even though an amplifier does not probably enter discontinous-current-mode for 1W.
Is the filter of order higher than 2?
200kHz bandwidth at 500kHz switching?
For simple LC it would mean ~10-12dB of carrier attenuation = radio emission like hell = no CE = jail ???
If that's really that simple to filter just one octave below switching frequency then hey! why don't all do it like this?
Is the filter of order higher than 2?
200kHz bandwidth at 500kHz switching?
For simple LC it would mean ~10-12dB of carrier attenuation = radio emission like hell = no CE = jail ???
If that's really that simple to filter just one octave below switching frequency then hey! why don't all do it like this?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.