Re: Re: I love irony
A well written reply, and I respect that. You should note the information I post which I'm sure is upsetting to certain people is pretty well factual and fairly well referenced, if it's untrue someone would say so wouldn't they? I sure hope so.
I don't respect snake oil, and I don't respect a company that chooses to rely on snake oil and what I consider cheap tactics and outright lies to push their product by making it something it isn't. Shouldn't the sound sell it?
Then there's the reviewers, who I feel should be working for YOU and ME but instead they obviously don't and chose to cater to the snake oil side of things. Why not keep them in check too with a little honest feedback?
Someone said reviewers used to review based on just measurements, well we know why that isn't enough. They also said they now rely on listening tests exclusively. I'd be more interested in an unbiased review that's honest and informative without twisting facts and leaving out what I think has become obvious to all, like their #1 competition.
It all seems like a tight collective of BS to me. I backed up that view with numerous references, you can't prove me wrong can you. So how can you then say let's give it a listen, when the thing can hardly hold itself together, and because of that same reason you yourself are unwilling to shell out to get one? Who according to you should then try it, with their equipment and money in place of your own, who's money is worth less than yours?
How about, they get their act together, and release a worthy product, this would leave them with less time to plug it on forums and BS about it, but in the end, if their technology is indeed worthy, it will make it, and we'll be better off for it.
Now you see my motivation, clearly spelled out for you, should you choose to twist this.. I'll have my fun as well.
If people just act like fanboys because of some good press on it, I assure you **** and lies is what they'll continue to sell, because they can. As far as I'm concerned I offer them a service, free of charge no less.
You say I'm biased, I just like honesty, and what works. No manufacturer is safe from this, not one, go ahead and ask Hypex. This isn't a marketing based forum so if it's the truth we want.... someone has to speak it, and it should not be subtle.
As per my reference to the other thread, it was well in context I thought, and I read the thread enough to know exactly what it's about.
Everyone had valide points. Lars may have noticed an improvement, his theory behind it was OK, but he did /does have a vested interest because it's obviously a product he's selling, he's obviously not going to say no it does't make a difference. Since he's selling it, it actually is up to him to provide the scientific data on it, and it's up to us to validate that data, as his testing may not have been entirely scientific, if at all, and the results could have easily been meaningless, so jan's points were all dead on. Lars wasn't being attacked at all, and the point about "woppling" not actually being an audible problem is also valide, because so many good supplies are built without that already....
Your remarks in that thread weren't of a technical nature, basically only having parroted one tired cliche after the other in order to keep the embers glowing, in true troll fashion, and you got called on it. No I'd say it was used in perfect context, but I'll give you this, it was a bit of a cheap shot. Eye for an eye I suppose.
So I try to silence the dishonest reviewer and manufacturer alike, they're welcome to mend their ways and that will shut me up. You try to silence me... to what agenda? Why should anyone want to try a faulty product that shouldn't even be on the market? Why should you recommend that they do when you're unwilling to yourself? I think most would greatly appreciate spending their money on something that will at least last awhile, show us your review, let us know how well it worked for you and how well your money was spent, bring that on. That is why I said you might be dangerous, not even willing to take your own advice.
I think I'm still sticking with all the same points here, having twisted nothing, that's not desperatly trying to get out of anything, but people will see what they want to anyway, you, me, everyone. I can be convinced but that's best done with facts and sound convictions based on them, a third person insult or two only serves to amuse me.
As per this:
"CIA claims that they use a modified implementation of the UcD module. Is this true? Is it marketing speak? We wont know until an AB comparison is done with a stock module vs theirs."
By my definition of it I'd say that's more trolling, but all the same.. Yes it is modified, yes it makes a difference over a stock module, yes anyone is free to modify their own, and basic facts of better components and better circuitry (like aux. supplies for the input stage etc) obviously make a difference, so once again the soundness of the technology speaks for itself and there's absolutely no use or requirement for AB testing
Also, make note that I never once claimed any particular product couldn't sound good. So your argument seems invalide right there.
Best Regards,
Chris
Agisthos said:
Chris, you are trying desperately to get out of it, but a simple glance at your comments shows someone who has never heard a nuforce amp and yet takes no small opportunity to attack the company and cast them in a bad light. It is like you are out to 'get' them, for whatever reasons I have no idea.
And when exposed for your bias you are saying Im the troll? Experience with forum posters show me Im never going to change your mind but the truth is there for all to see.
Ill tell you my perpective, and that is I want the best sound possible for the lowest price, regardless of which company or technology makes the product. I have no bias except to my wallet, and that is the philosphy Im sure a lot of DIY people have.
CIA claims that they use a modified implementation of the UcD module. Is this true? Is it marketing speak? We wont know until an AB comparison is done with a stock module vs theirs.
And as for that post you have linked to out of context, let me give the context here.
Lars Clausen made a comment that he found that putting many capacitors in parallel can have a slow effect on the bass compared to having a matrix style capacitor bank.
What did Lars get for this? He was attacked and ridiculed by people who claimed that it could not possibly have any effect. Those people were not willing to try it for themself and see the effect, they were just content to sit on the sideline and proclaim it was rubbish without any knowledge at all.
Lars could well be talking *****, but until I hear or build his power supply bank technique I will not know and not pass judgement.
And when I defended him against people who have never heard or tried his approach what was I called? A troll. Sound familiar?
I do enjoy your comments on this forum Chris, as your technical expertise far outweights mine, I just wish people would stop the bias and judgements for things they have never tried. It seems to be a huge issue in the audio world.
A well written reply, and I respect that. You should note the information I post which I'm sure is upsetting to certain people is pretty well factual and fairly well referenced, if it's untrue someone would say so wouldn't they? I sure hope so.
I don't respect snake oil, and I don't respect a company that chooses to rely on snake oil and what I consider cheap tactics and outright lies to push their product by making it something it isn't. Shouldn't the sound sell it?
Then there's the reviewers, who I feel should be working for YOU and ME but instead they obviously don't and chose to cater to the snake oil side of things. Why not keep them in check too with a little honest feedback?
Someone said reviewers used to review based on just measurements, well we know why that isn't enough. They also said they now rely on listening tests exclusively. I'd be more interested in an unbiased review that's honest and informative without twisting facts and leaving out what I think has become obvious to all, like their #1 competition.
It all seems like a tight collective of BS to me. I backed up that view with numerous references, you can't prove me wrong can you. So how can you then say let's give it a listen, when the thing can hardly hold itself together, and because of that same reason you yourself are unwilling to shell out to get one? Who according to you should then try it, with their equipment and money in place of your own, who's money is worth less than yours?
How about, they get their act together, and release a worthy product, this would leave them with less time to plug it on forums and BS about it, but in the end, if their technology is indeed worthy, it will make it, and we'll be better off for it.
Now you see my motivation, clearly spelled out for you, should you choose to twist this.. I'll have my fun as well.
If people just act like fanboys because of some good press on it, I assure you **** and lies is what they'll continue to sell, because they can. As far as I'm concerned I offer them a service, free of charge no less.
You say I'm biased, I just like honesty, and what works. No manufacturer is safe from this, not one, go ahead and ask Hypex. This isn't a marketing based forum so if it's the truth we want.... someone has to speak it, and it should not be subtle.
As per my reference to the other thread, it was well in context I thought, and I read the thread enough to know exactly what it's about.
Everyone had valide points. Lars may have noticed an improvement, his theory behind it was OK, but he did /does have a vested interest because it's obviously a product he's selling, he's obviously not going to say no it does't make a difference. Since he's selling it, it actually is up to him to provide the scientific data on it, and it's up to us to validate that data, as his testing may not have been entirely scientific, if at all, and the results could have easily been meaningless, so jan's points were all dead on. Lars wasn't being attacked at all, and the point about "woppling" not actually being an audible problem is also valide, because so many good supplies are built without that already....
Your remarks in that thread weren't of a technical nature, basically only having parroted one tired cliche after the other in order to keep the embers glowing, in true troll fashion, and you got called on it. No I'd say it was used in perfect context, but I'll give you this, it was a bit of a cheap shot. Eye for an eye I suppose.
So I try to silence the dishonest reviewer and manufacturer alike, they're welcome to mend their ways and that will shut me up. You try to silence me... to what agenda? Why should anyone want to try a faulty product that shouldn't even be on the market? Why should you recommend that they do when you're unwilling to yourself? I think most would greatly appreciate spending their money on something that will at least last awhile, show us your review, let us know how well it worked for you and how well your money was spent, bring that on. That is why I said you might be dangerous, not even willing to take your own advice.
I think I'm still sticking with all the same points here, having twisted nothing, that's not desperatly trying to get out of anything, but people will see what they want to anyway, you, me, everyone. I can be convinced but that's best done with facts and sound convictions based on them, a third person insult or two only serves to amuse me.
As per this:
"CIA claims that they use a modified implementation of the UcD module. Is this true? Is it marketing speak? We wont know until an AB comparison is done with a stock module vs theirs."
By my definition of it I'd say that's more trolling, but all the same.. Yes it is modified, yes it makes a difference over a stock module, yes anyone is free to modify their own, and basic facts of better components and better circuitry (like aux. supplies for the input stage etc) obviously make a difference, so once again the soundness of the technology speaks for itself and there's absolutely no use or requirement for AB testing
Also, make note that I never once claimed any particular product couldn't sound good. So your argument seems invalide right there.Best Regards,
Chris
I doubt very much CIA would modify anything much on UcD180/400. However choice of some components OUTSIDE the UcD module will affect how the finished product sound. Audiophiles are known to replace electrolytic capacitors with very expensive Black Gate caps that cost as much if not more than the UcD module, to get the lst 0.1% improvement that they believe they hear.
But then I wonder why Black Gate production will be stopped soon.
I do have UcD modules and I can see how difficult it is to modify anything in the epoxied control circuit.
But then I wonder why Black Gate production will be stopped soon.
I do have UcD modules and I can see how difficult it is to modify anything in the epoxied control circuit.
koolkid731 said:
Hello,
Now you sound like me
I think we're talking symantics. I wouldn't imagine there's a need for the modulator itself to be modified in any way, or that they've that ability anymore than we do. Perhaps we'll use the word "tweaked" instead of modified. See the hot rod thread for a few ideas you can do yourself.
BlackGates are insanely expensive and so that basically leaves their entire market the "high end" range and that's not very big. If they can't produce them cheaper... bye bye. At the same time, it could easily be a cheap tactic to get people to buy up stock at inflated prices so they can make more money. Those "to be discontinued" adds have been around for awhile, and are always accompanied with "stocks won't last, buy now, we have them". Not everyone likes them either, and it's not like there aren't much cheaper alternatives which may be just as good if not far better.
Regards,
Chris
Re: Nuforce
No, there is not a dealer yet in SA, but I imagine there will be one soon.
I have plans for a diy Hypex system which would only cost around $1000 AUD even with dual mono power supplies, so Im hoping this will give the same level of perfomance for a third of the cost.
PHEONIX said:
No, there is not a dealer yet in SA, but I imagine there will be one soon.
I have plans for a diy Hypex system which would only cost around $1000 AUD even with dual mono power supplies, so Im hoping this will give the same level of perfomance for a third of the cost.
Re: Re: Re: I love irony
You seem to have confused the point of that statement about CIA. Originally you tried to belittle me by pointing out UcD had been named twice and I was too ignorant to know.
Of course rather than state "I know full well Cia used a hypex module..." I just made a statement about the differences claimed by CIA in their approach. It wasnt having a go at you, or CIA,a nd its a product I would like to hear if I lived in the US.
As for the rest, okay truce ClassD, I think we come from the same page anyway in regards to claims by manufacturers.
classd4sure said:
As per this:
"CIA claims that they use a modified implementation of the UcD module. Is this true? Is it marketing speak? We wont know until an AB comparison is done with a stock module vs theirs."
By my definition of it I'd say that's more trolling, but all the same.. Yes it is modified, yes it makes a difference over a stock module, yes anyone is free to modify their own, and basic facts of better components and better circuitry (like aux. supplies for the input stage etc) obviously make a difference, so once again the soundness of the technology speaks for itself and there's absolutely no use or requirement for AB testing
Best Regards,
Chris
You seem to have confused the point of that statement about CIA. Originally you tried to belittle me by pointing out UcD had been named twice and I was too ignorant to know.
Of course rather than state "I know full well Cia used a hypex module..." I just made a statement about the differences claimed by CIA in their approach. It wasnt having a go at you, or CIA,a nd its a product I would like to hear if I lived in the US.
As for the rest, okay truce ClassD, I think we come from the same page anyway in regards to claims by manufacturers.
Actually that possible meaning to your post crossed my mind but I didn't give you the credit for it, obviously not being someone who's at all concerned with my level of embarrassment, and dismissed it as quickly. Besides, I figured you'd twist my reply to your purpose regardless.
Though, I see you're now bored of playing with me, having asked for a truce. OK, but trust that I'm not in the least confused.
Good luck with your UCD project, and dont' worry, I'm sure if they perform at the level of the ref9 you can get them exchanged.
Chris
PS: This domain has expired.
PPS: The future of class D should not be determined by marketing, snake oil, or reviewers who seem to have a foot in both.
Though, I see you're now bored of playing with me, having asked for a truce. OK, but trust that I'm not in the least confused.
Good luck with your UCD project, and dont' worry, I'm sure if they perform at the level of the ref9 you can get them exchanged.
Chris
PS: This domain has expired.
PPS: The future of class D should not be determined by marketing, snake oil, or reviewers who seem to have a foot in both.
Re: Is "digital fart" the technical term?
Its a good find because Tranh Nguyen (head of nuforce) said that back in 2002. And 4 years later we have not seen any sign of an IC chip version of his technology.
Its a similar story with www.mueta.com who had been promising their IC since 2000/2001?
It just goes to show the time it takes to make a discreet design into a working IC. A lot of years
classd4sure said:
Its a good find because Tranh Nguyen (head of nuforce) said that back in 2002. And 4 years later we have not seen any sign of an IC chip version of his technology.
Its a similar story with www.mueta.com who had been promising their IC since 2000/2001?
It just goes to show the time it takes to make a discreet design into a working IC. A lot of years
Well, to add my 2-cents to the discussion I think Nuforce is making a rather abismal entry if you look at the build quality versus price. It looks as if they indeed count on the 'sound' of their class-D solution to sell these amplifiers rather than a balanced combination of these three.
From where I'm sitting part of any amplifier design is a proper build, either by using off-the-shelf components or a custom design. What I've seen from Nuforce thusfar is enough to not consider a purchase, based solely on the look and feel of how they built these amplifiers, regardless of how it sounds.
Any manufacturer that takes itself seriously and pitches their products as 'high-end', which Nuforce does by setting such a price-point, should make sure that that pricetag is met with an impeccable build. Currently the Nuforce amplifier has a build quality far worse than the cheapest A/V receiver at CostCo.
So the future of class-D is certainly not in the hands of this amplifier, it simply lacks the attention to detail other manufacturers have clearly displayed. It looks to me like they're simply looking for favorable reviews to boost sales in order to cash in on the current class-D hype. Considering the low-quality build of their amplifiers the potential revenue is substantial, as their cost is low.
Best regards,
Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com
From where I'm sitting part of any amplifier design is a proper build, either by using off-the-shelf components or a custom design. What I've seen from Nuforce thusfar is enough to not consider a purchase, based solely on the look and feel of how they built these amplifiers, regardless of how it sounds.
Any manufacturer that takes itself seriously and pitches their products as 'high-end', which Nuforce does by setting such a price-point, should make sure that that pricetag is met with an impeccable build. Currently the Nuforce amplifier has a build quality far worse than the cheapest A/V receiver at CostCo.
So the future of class-D is certainly not in the hands of this amplifier, it simply lacks the attention to detail other manufacturers have clearly displayed. It looks to me like they're simply looking for favorable reviews to boost sales in order to cash in on the current class-D hype. Considering the low-quality build of their amplifiers the potential revenue is substantial, as their cost is low.
Best regards,
Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com
So here I thought that class D would take the market by storm at some point, and it looks like it will just continue to keep limping along at least in high end audio.
Funny thing is that Hypex has gotten a lot of favorable press just from the DIY market, but Nuforce hasn't gotten this welcome from the same crowd. Since they (we) are such a small segment of the market I doubt it will effect them much. Hey they have gold binding posts!
Terry
Funny thing is that Hypex has gotten a lot of favorable press just from the DIY market, but Nuforce hasn't gotten this welcome from the same crowd. Since they (we) are such a small segment of the market I doubt it will effect them much. Hey they have gold binding posts!
Terry
Hypex and NuForce have different market targets, which are also imcompatible. One doesn't compete with his/her own customers. Hypex probably has higher margin but in absolute amount their revenue may be limited. Tripath does make end-product amplifiers, just ICs, and has declining fortune - stock price less than 50 cents anf getting lower. IcePower has cash-rich parent B&O and more resources to continuously improve their products.
Due to their energy efficiency, not their cost which is still higher than class-AB ICs, they 'll have their niche and a future on earth whose oil reserves will disappear some day soon.
Consumer audio is driven by cost. Most don't care enough to pay for higher audio quality.
Due to their energy efficiency, not their cost which is still higher than class-AB ICs, they 'll have their niche and a future on earth whose oil reserves will disappear some day soon.
Consumer audio is driven by cost. Most don't care enough to pay for higher audio quality.
Koolkid,
Nuforce is purely looked at from a technical perspective here. As of yet we only seem to have one forum member that has heard one. You should read some of the positive strokes they got at this thread.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54488
I don't get how you figure because of different target markets that there would be a competition with the customer base itself. In fact I would think just the opposite would be true. Take Nelson Pass for instance, makes products for the retail market, and designs and shares with the DIY Class D interested market. This forum is the place where many class D promoters get together, and would like nothing better than anything that would come along and make the best of imprssions on any market with class D as the focus.
It is becoming obvious which products are going to make a place in the high end audio/home theater markets, Tripath is not one of them.
It is unfortunate that NuForce has gotten off to a rocky start, I think everyone here would like that to be different. But they should take the critisisms here as positive and constructive, we only want them to succeed in the most positive way. One company can have a powerful force on the whole class D landscape, as has been shown by class D's past. Designers are determining the future of not just of themselves, but class D as a whole when it comes to the entire market.
TerryG
Nuforce is purely looked at from a technical perspective here. As of yet we only seem to have one forum member that has heard one. You should read some of the positive strokes they got at this thread.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54488
I don't get how you figure because of different target markets that there would be a competition with the customer base itself. In fact I would think just the opposite would be true. Take Nelson Pass for instance, makes products for the retail market, and designs and shares with the DIY Class D interested market. This forum is the place where many class D promoters get together, and would like nothing better than anything that would come along and make the best of imprssions on any market with class D as the focus.
It is becoming obvious which products are going to make a place in the high end audio/home theater markets, Tripath is not one of them.
It is unfortunate that NuForce has gotten off to a rocky start, I think everyone here would like that to be different. But they should take the critisisms here as positive and constructive, we only want them to succeed in the most positive way. One company can have a powerful force on the whole class D landscape, as has been shown by class D's past. Designers are determining the future of not just of themselves, but class D as a whole when it comes to the entire market.
TerryG
Discrete class D made of common industrial MOSFETs (IRF530, etc) is probably already cheaper than chip amps of the same power -- construction cost excluded.
So there would be a dramatic expansion of class-D products in the future.
The key limiting factor may be the numbers of engineers capable of designing them (and make them reliable, pass EMI regulations, etc).
300KHz switching frequency is a high spec even in SMPS industry, say nothing of linear amplifiers engineers.
So there would be a dramatic expansion of class-D products in the future.
The key limiting factor may be the numbers of engineers capable of designing them (and make them reliable, pass EMI regulations, etc).
300KHz switching frequency is a high spec even in SMPS industry, say nothing of linear amplifiers engineers.
koolkid731 said:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.