“King” of the DIY amps? - Page 3

rick57 · 3rd March 2005, 11:48 PM

classd4sure

> A gainclone just isn't in the same class as this
Well GCs are great for the money, but have there faults.

To make sue there is no misinterpretation, it’s the gainclone we heard confusion in, not the UcD (which I’ve yet to hear).

Stefan
> I have noticed substational sonic differances with quite small changes in for example PSU design...

What works best?

So noone has heard any sibilance with the UcD - what tweeters are you using?

Yves Smolders · 4th March 2005, 07:16 AM

Quote:

So noone has heard any sibilance with the UcD - what tweeters are you using?

The famous "Turkey Blaster" on top of the now "old" Nautilus series B&W's

jeff mai · 4th March 2005, 07:59 AM

Hey Rick,

As you know, it's possible to DIY just about any amplifier circuit. How does the choice for "King" come down to being between digital or chip amps?

rick57 · 5th March 2005, 02:11 AM

I’ve seen you before on these forums - trying to trip people up, with facts and logic! But I’m ready for you now Mr Mai.

The three criteria I had in mind for the throne

were:

1 It must sound at least as good as a mid market commercial amp, but preferably much better. (I believe some of the ‘recognised’ commercial amps are as pleasant as fingernails on the chalkboard, gee glad I haven’t got any

).

2 It must not be too hard do build, so a newcomer has a reasonable prospect of building it with some due diligence, and not too great a risk of frying a digit or smoking the house. So for those people out there who are too much the forum junkie, not enough the doers, I’m giving extra points to simplicity of construction.

3 And for those people tight of wallet, or don’t want to have to lie to their other halves about their audio spanding, it should be attractively priced, to offset the time spent, say max $US 100/ channel, plus PS.

Yes, these criteria tilt the selection to chip and digital solutions.
Using just the first criteria, you might even allow obsolete technologies like tube amps into the selection process,

I believe some people even think they sound best!

But clearly these old fashioned tube types, like Prince Charles, are unlikely to ever be king. These people look at the rosy glows of their tubes, play wistful female singers and drink strange brews and probably at times smoke fragrant cigarettes, but are just out of touch with reality. There amps are almost as involved as a freakin Linkwitz dipole speaker, man who would want that?

And I hear that at some of these ‘Tube Guy Gatherings’

, some of them are actually solid sold state guys ‘undercover’, probably wearing tweed jackets, there listening to the ultimate valve dreams, then they walk away grinning, and build digital amps in a quarter the time, and laugh at them ha ha!

So what say ye, are these criteria unimpeachable or what?

Down with high electricity consumption! Save the planet!!

Solid state roolz!

Get with the times man!

mac · 5th March 2005, 02:37 AM

The UcD's have the most utterly transparent sound quality of any amp I've heard in my system. I thought they sounded fantastic with the standard NE552 buffers but I recently upgraded them to AD8620. The new buffers have raised the bar yet another notch. I highly doubt that these amps will be replaced in my system for a long while.

Cheers, mac.

rick57 · 5th March 2005, 02:45 AM

Jeff

What's that term card players use - lay down misere?

There seems nuthin these UcDs don't do well.

Move over Doug, not blameless: faultless?!?

mac

What parts of your Orion are you using them in?

jeff mai · 5th March 2005, 03:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by rick57
Move over Doug, not blameless: faultless?!?

Wake up!

You're dreaming again...

Chip amps and Class D modules don't really qualify as DIY amps anyway. They're more like DIY power supplies and chassis. The amp part is already built!

jeff mai · 5th March 2005, 03:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by rick57
The three criteria I had in mind for the throne were:

1 It must sound at least as good as a mid market commercial amp.
2 It must not be too hard do build
3 it should be attractively priced, to offset the time spent, say max $US 100

Ah, so nothing to do with ultimate sound quality then...

Carry on!

mac · 5th March 2005, 03:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by rick57
mac

What parts of your Orion are you using them in?

Rick, These amps make me wish I still had my Orions (well, almost). I've since moved on to a DEQX-based DIY system. I should probably update my avatar. Cheers, mac.

classd4sure · 5th March 2005, 03:13 AM

Hi,

A bit unrealistic I think.

For one thing you should define it around a certain power level, that will make a big difference in cost.

Then you should narrow it down further to a certain class of amp.

Gainclains are chip amps, they aren't switching amps though are they? I'm not sure.

You just can't compare a gainclone with a UCD180. That'd be like a Viper Vs a town bus and saying which is better? Well, you can carry more people with the bus but otherwise... (the gainclone is cheaper but otherwise... )

How about just going in basically the same power category like a sonic impact Vs a gainclone. That's more realistic, and I would suspect the gainclone comes up short.

You could also likely do a sonic impact mod for the price range you mentioned, I don't see you meeting that criteria with a UCD, unless maybe you cut every single corner you possibly could and in that would be such a waste.

Are you maybe trying to talk yourself into spending more money than you want to and getting a UCD? That's a tough choice, but yeah, the unspoken KING is undisputed.

Regards,
Chris

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
Thanks Mr King	marec	Full Range	9	29th January 2009 03:32 AM
The "King of Instruments" is dead, long live the king	jackinnj	Instruments and Amps	0	26th May 2005 12:47 PM
“King” of the DIY amps?	rick57	Chip Amps	2	16th February 2005 07:17 PM
The King is dead, God save the King!	destroyer X	Solid State	18	16th October 2004 12:37 PM
ANALOG(UE) is KING	davesaudio	Everything Else	1	14th November 2003 04:17 PM

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

3rd March 2005, 11:48 PM	#21
rick57 diyAudio Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: dry ol Melbourne Australia	classd4sure > A gainclone just isn't in the same class as this Well GCs are great for the money, but have there faults. To make sue there is no misinterpretation, it’s the gainclone we heard confusion in, not the UcD (which I’ve yet to hear). Stefan > I have noticed substational sonic differances with quite small changes in for example PSU design... What works best? So noone has heard any sibilance with the UcD - what tweeters are you using?

4th March 2005, 07:59 AM	#23
jeff mai diyAudio Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Melbourne	Hey Rick, As you know, it's possible to DIY just about any amplifier circuit. How does the choice for "King" come down to being between digital or chip amps?

5th March 2005, 02:11 AM	#24
rick57 diyAudio Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: dry ol Melbourne Australia	I’ve seen you before on these forums - trying to trip people up, with facts and logic! But I’m ready for you now Mr Mai. The three criteria I had in mind for the throne were: 1 It must sound at least as good as a mid market commercial amp, but preferably much better. (I believe some of the ‘recognised’ commercial amps are as pleasant as fingernails on the chalkboard, gee glad I haven’t got any ). 2 It must not be too hard do build, so a newcomer has a reasonable prospect of building it with some due diligence, and not too great a risk of frying a digit or smoking the house. So for those people out there who are too much the forum junkie, not enough the doers, I’m giving extra points to simplicity of construction. 3 And for those people tight of wallet, or don’t want to have to lie to their other halves about their audio spanding, it should be attractively priced, to offset the time spent, say max $US 100/ channel, plus PS. Yes, these criteria tilt the selection to chip and digital solutions. Using just the first criteria, you might even allow obsolete technologies like tube amps into the selection process, I believe some people even think they sound best! But clearly these old fashioned tube types, like Prince Charles, are unlikely to ever be king. These people look at the rosy glows of their tubes, play wistful female singers and drink strange brews and probably at times smoke fragrant cigarettes, but are just out of touch with reality. There amps are almost as involved as a freakin Linkwitz dipole speaker, man who would want that? And I hear that at some of these ‘Tube Guy Gatherings’ , some of them are actually solid sold state guys ‘undercover’, probably wearing tweed jackets, there listening to the ultimate valve dreams, then they walk away grinning, and build digital amps in a quarter the time, and laugh at them ha ha! So what say ye, are these criteria unimpeachable or what? Down with high electricity consumption! Save the planet!! Solid state roolz! Get with the times man!

5th March 2005, 02:37 AM	#25
mac diyAudio Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Puget Sound	The UcD's have the most utterly transparent sound quality of any amp I've heard in my system. I thought they sounded fantastic with the standard NE552 buffers but I recently upgraded them to AD8620. The new buffers have raised the bar yet another notch. I highly doubt that these amps will be replaced in my system for a long while. Cheers, mac.

5th March 2005, 02:45 AM	#26
rick57 diyAudio Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: dry ol Melbourne Australia	Jeff What's that term card players use - lay down misere? There seems nuthin these UcDs don't do well. Move over Doug, not blameless: faultless?!? mac What parts of your Orion are you using them in?

5th March 2005, 03:13 AM	#30
classd4sure Account Disabled Join Date: Feb 2004	Hi, A bit unrealistic I think. For one thing you should define it around a certain power level, that will make a big difference in cost. Then you should narrow it down further to a certain class of amp. Gainclains are chip amps, they aren't switching amps though are they? I'm not sure. You just can't compare a gainclone with a UCD180. That'd be like a Viper Vs a town bus and saying which is better? Well, you can carry more people with the bus but otherwise... (the gainclone is cheaper but otherwise... ) How about just going in basically the same power category like a sonic impact Vs a gainclone. That's more realistic, and I would suspect the gainclone comes up short. You could also likely do a sonic impact mod for the price range you mentioned, I don't see you meeting that criteria with a UCD, unless maybe you cut every single corner you possibly could and in that would be such a waste. Are you maybe trying to talk yourself into spending more money than you want to and getting a UCD? That's a tough choice, but yeah, the unspoken KING is undisputed. Regards, Chris