hypex ncore - Page 9 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Commercial Sector > Vendor Forums > Vendor's Bazaar

Vendor's Bazaar Commercial Vendors large & small hawking their wares

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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 16th June 2011, 01:49 PM   #81
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno Putzeys View Post
@TheShaman
Actually I've always felt that the effect of UcD400's "sweating" had more to do with current than with voltage, which is why I set so much stall on 2 ohm performance. My hunch there would be that a 600W/2 ohm module would be preferable to 600W/4. Something to ponder. The UcD product range remains in place.
Yes, a 300@8/600@4/900@2, high current module was what I had in mind when writing my previous post (I took the vastly improved performance of the new modules @ low impedance loads as a given - you've spoiled us already!).
In any case, I trust your hunch and I'm sure I'll be a happy Ncore owner.

Last edited by TheShaman; 16th June 2011 at 01:54 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2011, 02:25 PM   #82
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Austria
Bruno, thanks !
Back to nCore - if best selling modules are UCD180 followed by UCD400 and lot less UCD700. it's easy to conclude that for DIY market best is to have something that is powered around Ucd400. If you want to offer only one model and if nCore1200 would cost more then UCD700 (likely) there will be number of DIY-ers who will go after it , but i think in the end (with smps1200) to spend 500+ EUR per channel is expensive (irrespective of the quality) and numbers sold would not be (very) high.

I'd suggest two models.
1. One lower powered , more like UCD400 (200/8 up to 600-700w/2Ohm) leveraging existing SMPS400 .. or maybe SMPS1200 for stereo... that might drive all those people who went after UCD180 and/or UCD400 and even some with UCD700 to upgrade for higher quality and bit less power
2. Second one basically would almost double that power - and would nCore1200

hope this helps a little
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2011, 03:00 PM   #83
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
I know I'm banging a lonely drum here so i'll say it just this one more time then shut up

Quote:
Originally Posted by hanswolek View Post
if best selling modules are UCD180 followed by UCD400 and lot less UCD700. it's easy to conclude that for DIY market best is to have something that is powered around Ucd400.
It's even easier to conclude that it is best to have one like the best selling UCD180 rather the the second string. Just how much power do you need to drive normalish speakers in a normal domestic environment and without mr. average speaker owner worrying about the speakers being destroyed when some spotty oik comes round and turns the knob up all the way for a few seconds?

There is a market for a much higher powered amp. But it is a different market. And 400 & 700 watt amps are (cost variations aside) hitting the same market, not the larger lower powered market.

Quote:
If you want to offer only one model and if nCore1200 would cost more then UCD700 (likely) there will be number of DIY-ers who will go after it , but i think in the end (with smps1200) to spend 500+ EUR per channel is expensive (irrespective of the quality) and numbers sold would not be (very) high.

I'd suggest two models.
1. One lower powered , more like UCD400 (200/8 up to 600-700w/2Ohm) leveraging existing SMPS400 .. or maybe SMPS1200 for stereo... that might drive all those people who went after UCD180 and/or UCD400 and even some with UCD700 to upgrade for higher quality and bit less power
2. Second one basically would almost double that power - and would nCore1200

hope this helps a little
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2011, 04:00 PM   #84
von Ah is offline von Ah  United States
diyAudio Member
 
von Ah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Maryland, USA
You're not on your own, goosewing - I agree with that logic. It would be nice for DIY'ers to have cutting edge technology at lower power options as well.

I am a much less informed audio enthusiast than the contributors here, but what about the option of adjustable gain to allow for a wider range of applications? Could that not help the decision of high vs higher power output?
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2011, 04:06 PM   #85
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Cruz, California
Packaging: UcD400s have a lovely form factor. One can turn them sideways and place six on a heat sink (chassis mounting doesn't dissipate enough heat at that density) for triamped speakers. I imagine the ncore circuit would need more space, so the circuit board could be as wide as 100 mm (from 75 mm) and still fit comfortably within a heatsink mounted on a 3U chassis.

If possible, mounting holes in the same pattern as a UcD400 would allow for simple upgrades.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2011, 04:15 PM   #86
hisense is offline hisense  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
I would have to agree that two different models would be the ideal solution.

It is unlikley one size will fit all.

I am sure there will be people wanting to use these in 3 way active applications, especially with new dsp's coming to market...

Having one module capable of high current / power into 2 ohm would not be the solution to the many single, large 8ohm bass driver applications. For these applications and large demanding full range ncore1200 would be ideal.

The smaller module perfect for the majority of normal domestic passive applications and mid / hf duty in active setups. Something similar to UCD400.

I have also experienced UCD400/SMPS400 running out of steam on the larger passive speakers.

These new modules and power supplies are likely to be expensive to reflect the R&D and technology advancement - more argument for allowing amps / systems be assembled that can truly replace the big Brystons and similar. If only middle of the road output was available it would be more difficult to justify.

Again just my 2pence worth and i am sure the products will be a well considered compromise to the needs of all.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2011, 04:37 PM   #87
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Switzerland
Hi Bruno

Congratulations for making this amp commercially available in the meantime.

I would also opt for two models, separated by a ratio of 1:4 in terms of power. Like 300 Watts and 1200 Watts for instance. The 300 Watts could easily fulfil the needs of the UcD 180 users as well.

And yes, the capability of driving low impedance loads would definitely be fine.

Another nice feature would be on-board DC protection.

Regards

Charles
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2011, 05:50 PM   #88
brunob is offline brunob  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Erlangen, Germany
I am looking for an amp to drive my DIY open baffle subwoofer and I want an amp with the max control on the woofer and the tightest possible bass.

Would a hypex ncore be a good candidate?

I am presently using a Hypex DS800 plate amp.

Thanks,

Bruno
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2011, 06:39 PM   #89
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BE/NL/RW/ZA
Under the current circumstances (development capacity) it's really hard to know if and when we can do a second DIY model, so even if it happens we've got to presume it won't, for now. Much as I'd love to duplicate the 180-400-700 trio, it's best to presume we'll have only one model for the foreseeable future.

Re replacing Big-name-chunky-amps, I think I should explain the commercial situation I am juggling when specifying modules for different markets. Yes, we want to replace these big amps with Ncore. In fact that is the very point. But we want to do so by winning manufacturers of such amps over to make the final switch to class D. If previous experience marketing UcD is anything to go by, having a big ballsy DIY module out there that anyone can buy is a serious liability. It may make our prospective customers feel they can better differentiate themselves on the market by not moving to class D or worse, moving to someone else's. Believe it or not, that has happened. We have seen people designing in a competing product which they admitted was vastly inferior to UcD, only because it was relatively unknown and in the (correct) presumption that enough hi-fi reviewers are technical and sonic relativists. You get a better review if they have a new story to tell.

It gets hairier. If we liberally sell an OEM module to too many manufacturers of such gear, the same situation results: "Hypex gents, how am I going to differentiate myself from your other customers?" If you were wondering what the whole thing of "selected customers" on the announcement is about, it's this. There is going to be an optimum mix of customers in different marketplaces to give the best return in terms of turnover and (pardon my french) brand equity and flexibility to do that measured amount of customizing as is de rigueur in the high end audio trade.

And in amongst that I'm trying to create a module for direct sale to the people closest to my heart ie. DIY enthousiasts. An NC1200-like module would upset any form of marketing strategy we might wish to deploy in the OEM market so that simply isn't on the cards, much as I'd love to do otherwise What I can do is design a module with features that -hopefully- DIY users value and VARs don't. Some of those are obvious like connectors that are easy to use for one-offs but not in a production environment (like the screw tag). Another is the discrete buffers which we've decided to use during the course of this thread.

It's that sort of thing I'm fishing for here: how can I make a module that is at once as close as possible to a DIY enthousiast's dream and useless to a VAR.

So you thought designing a class D amp was tough. Try product management for a change...

Last edited by Bruno Putzeys; 16th June 2011 at 06:50 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2011, 06:49 PM   #90
diyAudio Member
 
eclectic2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Silicon Valley
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheShaman View Post
This is going to be a statement amplifier so it's very likely it'll be used on statement loudspeakers.
I don't know about this statement amplifier thing. It's a DIY module. If Bruno & team make it too good it eats into their OEM high end customers. I think this should not become too expensive...

Quote:
[Not that I believe there is such a thing as "too much power", but I can understand the "too expensive" term]
that's my take.
300@8/600@4 is a good size I agree. To me that's already a "big" amp. UcD400 size would also be OK though by me.
2x UcD700's cost almost $1000 USD. So I'm just hoping the cost does not get out of control for the ncore DIY version...
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hypex problem, who can help Hansms Class D 9 18th August 2013 07:49 AM
Hypex steveww Class D 14 18th November 2010 02:44 PM
Question for those who have tried hypex smps with hypex modules avian Class D 12 3rd March 2009 10:30 AM
Hypex UcD 180AD + signal wires, Power Supply ST, Hypex Transformer TR100A c10h12n2 Swap Meet 7 7th July 2007 04:55 PM
FS: Hypex UcD 400/180AD, hypex toroid Archmage Swap Meet 4 14th November 2006 05:23 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:09 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2