Ok, so you say in other words that a low efficiency speaker is less sensitive to amplification imperfections, right?
If you want to say that, you can. However, you might get some push back from others that might take offense. Admitting that lower efficiency loudspeakers have lower requirements with respect to amplifier quality isn't the only tradeoff you're making. Other significant kinds of distortions come into play (e.g., thermal compression, FMD and AMD, etc.) that more than offset that apparently positive comment.
I'm not trying to sway you from your plans, I only offer my experience--and have clarified under what conditions I experienced it. I know that, personally, wouldn't buy an amplifier that has known or highly suspect "first watt" sound quality issues, and I shared that--because you asked the question: "2) how do the Hypex FA modules 'sound', in terms of audio quality?". That was the question I answered.
Your decisions on what you plan to do are yours.
Cheers,
Chris
Mine was just a simplistic sinthesys, not any kind of provocation, sure, I agree and I know there are many other factors in the equation.
I thank you very much for your sharing your personal experience.
I thank you very much for your sharing your personal experience.
I am sorry if I offended you, it was not my intent. I simply wanted to offer the OP an alternate perspective.
Thinking about the reproduction at low levels, a doubt occurred to me: could the singularly described deterioration in quality be due, rather than to a bad stage of amplification, to an incorrect, or inconvenient, programming of the general levels of channels in the digital domani by user? I'm not expert on the subject but if the levels are managed digitally in PCM, the consistent reduction of a level inherently forces the signal to be sampled in a few bits and I believe this degrades the more the signal the higher the frequency.
I don't know if the modules in question are programmable to carry out this treatment, if yes it should be enough to avoid drastic general volume reductions in the stages that work in PCM of the various channels. This may be necessary when it comes to aligning speakers with very different sensitivities, but perhaps the problem could be stemmed with resistive dividers at the terminals, as is done in the world of passive crossovers.
Could this be a plausible explanation?
I don't know if the modules in question are programmable to carry out this treatment, if yes it should be enough to avoid drastic general volume reductions in the stages that work in PCM of the various channels. This may be necessary when it comes to aligning speakers with very different sensitivities, but perhaps the problem could be stemmed with resistive dividers at the terminals, as is done in the world of passive crossovers.
Could this be a plausible explanation?
I've heard quite a few solutions with Hypex Fusion modules - no problems- sounded just fine!
Definitely solution B! If you really want to make the speaker "kick" a little more. Then add a side firing woofer and "snoop" the signal to another DSP controlled amplifier for the subs - because minimum 2 sub will make it easier + the added low frequencies from the mains, will give you extra low frequency-sources - which again will smoothen out the total response in the room.
Is the Morel tweeter with a waveguide?
Definitely solution B! If you really want to make the speaker "kick" a little more. Then add a side firing woofer and "snoop" the signal to another DSP controlled amplifier for the subs - because minimum 2 sub will make it easier + the added low frequencies from the mains, will give you extra low frequency-sources - which again will smoothen out the total response in the room.
Is the Morel tweeter with a waveguide?
To play Devils advocate here, theoretically it could be that the Hypex are so low in distortion it reveals the quality of some high efficiency drivers. Just a thought.
It could also be that the gain structure is not optimal. With a 105 dB sensitivity driver and a FA252 that can output 150W into 8 ohms, at 0 dBFS we get 105 + 22 = 127 dB. At a normal listening level we are at least down to -40 dBFS. At this signal level, a 20-bit AD/DA will effectively become 13-14 bits at best, and the FusionAmp's 100 dB SINAD will be reduced to 60 dB.
This is exactly what I imagined and put as a question in my poor poor words a few posts earlier. I therefore imagine and hope that the general volume control in the modules in question does not act directly on the PCM signal but somehow only on the final amplification stage (if one can say so in this type of architecture). If this were not the case, I imagine that those who normally listen at low levels like me could not have obtained satisfactions like those described here.
Everything in these modules is done in DSP. If you end up with a bad gain structure, it might not be a good idea. However - using speakers with sensitivity in the 85-90 dB range (as most speakers are), it will not be a problem at all. I use FusionAmps with great results on my Magnepan speakers, where the sensitivity is quite low.
There's nothing wrong with the Fusion Amps. However the "tweeter" channel should only be used above 500hz. 🙂
The tweeter channel (NC100HF module) does not like low impedance either. It was unable to drive my 3 ohm Magnepan ribbon tweeters, even crossed over as high as 4 kHz.
The main issue with the tweeter channel is that the current limiter puts the module into so-called "hiccup" mode very fast. Even a small transient will trigger the 9A current limiter.
It's obviously been designed for typical 8 ohm / 90 dB dome tweeters, and not 3 ohm / 82 dB ribbons.
It's obviously been designed for typical 8 ohm / 90 dB dome tweeters, and not 3 ohm / 82 dB ribbons.
Hmm, this I need to check with my DSP, I have an analog possibility to reduce gain, but it's not used for the moment. I use a compression driver also...
If you have a separate DSP and power amps, the solution is to reduce the gain of the power amps so you don't end up with your peak levels at -50 dB, A simple L-pad at the power amp input will also work.
It was FA122s, not FA252s. I heard little in the way of increased noise floor issues which you imply--which would be the result due to reduction in effective bit depth due to increased amplifier output power (and I've heard that before with other higher power amplifiers and DSP crossovers to compare to). But soundstage, timbre, and clarity distortions (implying that some form of modulation distortion issues were present in the FA122s) were significantly affected relative to a Xilica XP-8080 crossover and First Watt F3 or Crown D75A amplifiers. The sound quality issues were quite apparent to anyone in the room, and were exactly as I described: like a single-ended triode amplifier with undersized output transformer--only worse.
Gain structure was adjusted via upstream preamp channel. It was crossed at 525 Hz, just like with the Xilica, etc. SPL response was flat to within ±1.5 dB at 1m (psychoacoustic smoothing). PEQ/crossover settings were largely the same as Xilica XP8080, Yamaha SP2060, miniDSP 2x4 HD, and ElectroVoice Dx38 settings using a variety of amplifiers.
If you have trouble accepting these results, I recommend setting up your own high quality 2" compression drivers/horns and have a listen instead of trying to shoot the messenger. That doesn't make the problem go away.
Chris
These problems don't apply to PP's MTM system.
But interesting info anyway, I'm working on a 3-way with CD horn and planning to use FA123. Now proto has minidsp and classB amp. We'll see if L-pad is needed...
But interesting info anyway, I'm working on a 3-way with CD horn and planning to use FA123. Now proto has minidsp and classB amp. We'll see if L-pad is needed...
I owned the Klipsch K-402 and used it together with Hypex NC400. I didn't experience anything of what you're describing. Quite the opposite.
Today I have a different horn speaker and use Vera Audio class D amplifiers where I set the gain to 12 dB for the compression driver/horn.
There are several others in Norway who also use either Hypex or Purifi with compression drivers and horns. They previosuly used class A or class AB but find today's class D solution sounding better and more transparent. Obviously the gain structure needs to be taken care of though.