thanks
I was thinking of buying either the X600.5 or the XA200.5 if I could find them used would be even better.
I would pair them with my B&W 800Signature.
I currently own the X250 which is a very nice amp, and I was either thinking of trying to build one myself first and then once I had fun buying one of these two beasts or just skipping the fun part and go into serious stuff!!
I was thinking of buying either the X600.5 or the XA200.5 if I could find them used would be even better.
I would pair them with my B&W 800Signature.
I currently own the X250 which is a very nice amp, and I was either thinking of trying to build one myself first and then once I had fun buying one of these two beasts or just skipping the fun part and go into serious stuff!!
Or maybe http://www.firstwatt.com/pdf/art_leave_classa.pdf
But, I think the answer is More Bias!
But, I think the answer is More Bias!
Well, I wonder why you are interested in those two models. One has double the bias and 4 times the power of the other?
Maybe the article ZM is refering to is this one:
http://www.firstwatt.com/pdf/art_peanut_butter.pdf
Maybe the article ZM is refering to is this one:
http://www.firstwatt.com/pdf/art_peanut_butter.pdf
Also, isn't one a complementary follower ouput and one and version of the Aleph type output?
One is complementary on the X/X.5, I thought the XA had the same topology but more bias, but it makes more sense that difference would also reside on output stage.
I doubt that it is like the Aleph though!
Since I have the X250 and I think it is a very nice amp and I have read that there is a LOT of difference between the first generation X250 and the X250.5 and also that the XA250.5 sounds very different from the X.5 series, I am trying to understand what are the major changes that can be attributed to the sonical difference between these models.
I know there is a different level of Class A to begin with between X.5 and XA. However what are the changes from the X250 and the X250.5 for example and is the XA200.5 the same topology as the X.5 series but given a different bias or there othe major circuit topology differences?
I know there is a different level of Class A to begin with between X.5 and XA. However what are the changes from the X250 and the X250.5 for example and is the XA200.5 the same topology as the X.5 series but given a different bias or there othe major circuit topology differences?
Just giving more thoughts to it, I am sure it is series regulation as it would be impossible to dissipate an oversized "Class A" power supply for a Pure oversized Class A power amp giving that the heatsinking capabilities are the same as the output power section
It looks like a lot of improvements have been made which would explain the wide sonic difference.
Thanks for the clarification.
I didn't even suspect that the 250.5 would use more MOSFETs at the OS.
Regarding the latest FE UGS design.
If I don't recall wrong several succesfull attemps were made to design the clone, I am assuming, that was related to the first generation.
Is there any design for the lastest as well?
Moreover, when you talk about SE biasing, I don't quite understand how it is achieved.
When I think of SE Bias I can think of the Aleph style where the curernt source on the top side biases the follower.
I have read the paper you guys have linked but I don't quite get how SE bias is applied to a push pull.
Is there any reference on the DIY to this subject?
Thanks a lot.
Last edited:
oh I see. However it is using a regulated PSU looking at the big enclosure deidcated to the supply section.
Also recall Nelson mentioning several time that regulated power amp sound better overall although lack of reservoir.
If you can make the regulator as big as the power amp I would assume you would get the benefits of both world which in my little experience cold possibly make a significant positive sonic difference at a price of bigger heat dissipation and more hardware.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.