kephaudio (or anyone else, really):
How do you feel about valves?? Have you or any of your audio buddies compared the UCD offerings to a good tube amp?
I'm quite interested in how they'd compare in terms of tone, timbre, and dynamics. TIA
How do you feel about valves?? Have you or any of your audio buddies compared the UCD offerings to a good tube amp?
I'm quite interested in how they'd compare in terms of tone, timbre, and dynamics. TIA
there have been some threads regarding that in here. i think in the ucd180 thread there are a few people that have compared. do a search for tubes in the class D forum and see what you come up with. i remember several people comparing the two, one guy had pathos, maybe that will come up in a search.
cowanrg said:
mmh! If you think this is silly...I suggest to you to not read this post. Simlpe, isn't it?
If you are so smart for this post, thank you very much indeed for your illuminating contributions an bye.
I am an audiphile I have never seen people listening to music in rooms greater than 8x8mts, say. So it is certainly silly to test an audio equipment in a stadium.
Many watts in audio are not supposed to play in stadiums; they are supposed to exist to drive extremely heavy loads. I know people that get crazy to drive Infinity RS Sigma, of course if you have 350 good WATTS they are the best think I have ever heard...but 350 good WATTS are not nuts.
For me 50 good watts are just enough for a regular system unless you have inefficient speakers less than 82db, that is another story.
Why we did that? Because, there are people that were suspecting that 180 and 400 sound different. We don't think so.
And now for the last time I will summarize the test (and if you don't like it, that's fine for me):
1. with the same psu topology and components they sounded equal unless for the maximum power which we didn't care about.
2. We couldn't build an R-Core based psu for the UcD400 (simply beacuse we didn't found a good rating).
3. we did the R-core based for the 180 which was estremely better than those based on toroids.
I liked the test, this shows to me (maybe not to you, but that is ok) that at least the 180 is not worse than 400 in terms of SOUND QUALITY.
So I will personally go for 180s and I will put the extra saved money on components. Less VA for a trsnformers means less money, less mF for caps means less money. Conlcusion with the same amount of money I can buy much better component that at the end I know will affect the SOUND.
I hope this helps to solve your puzzle about the stupidity of this post, I also hope that now you want to propose some serious argument.
Bye
KEPha
no need to get hostile.
first off, i apologize, i didnt realize you were talking meters. me being a stupid american, i forgot 6 meters is much different than 6 feet. i half-assumed it was meters, becuase a 6 foot room would be TINY, but still. i didnt realize what size exactly 6 meters was.
my major problem with the whole test was that you didnt care about maximum quality. so, why even introduce the 400? if your goal was to test a ucd180 vs. a ucd400, which you claimed, then use identical power supplies (the same ones for each, regardless of quality, you are testing the modules, NOT the supply).
BUT, if you want to test power supplies, use two ucd180's. there are just too many variables otherwise. that is all im saying. i understand now that you did test the 180 with and without the nicer transformers, caps, etc. but it would have been nice to have two sets built and do an A/B comparison, because rebuilding them takes awhile and will be hard to judge.
plus, the title was a bit misleading. it was really less about the two, and more about the power supplies. and earlier in the post you had a different idea about the two. you stated the 180 sounded better than the ucd400, and you didnt really say it was attributed to the power supply. now you are saying they sound the same. its just a bit inconsistant.
i understant completely what you are saying now, and its fine. there was just confusion, and im just telling you what it was for me. thats all. its not personal, its not an attack.
first off, i apologize, i didnt realize you were talking meters. me being a stupid american, i forgot 6 meters is much different than 6 feet. i half-assumed it was meters, becuase a 6 foot room would be TINY, but still. i didnt realize what size exactly 6 meters was.
my major problem with the whole test was that you didnt care about maximum quality. so, why even introduce the 400? if your goal was to test a ucd180 vs. a ucd400, which you claimed, then use identical power supplies (the same ones for each, regardless of quality, you are testing the modules, NOT the supply).
BUT, if you want to test power supplies, use two ucd180's. there are just too many variables otherwise. that is all im saying. i understand now that you did test the 180 with and without the nicer transformers, caps, etc. but it would have been nice to have two sets built and do an A/B comparison, because rebuilding them takes awhile and will be hard to judge.
plus, the title was a bit misleading. it was really less about the two, and more about the power supplies. and earlier in the post you had a different idea about the two. you stated the 180 sounded better than the ucd400, and you didnt really say it was attributed to the power supply. now you are saying they sound the same. its just a bit inconsistant.
i understant completely what you are saying now, and its fine. there was just confusion, and im just telling you what it was for me. thats all. its not personal, its not an attack.
valvaholic said:
Hi,
I am not a tube guy. I like tubes forom 200Hz to 20KHz, but in the intervall 20Hz-200Hz they just fall down. There good tube based amps that behaves very good at low frequencies...but with huge complication for speakers and money!!
I have also listen to a system based on hybrid amplification, it was too artifical for my tastes.
But I think that class D amps have the advantage that they are the best compromise between tube and transistors. I mean the UCDs have some features of tube amps, just listen to the high spectrum (above 10000) they are as smooth as tubes. But they have the advantges that at low frequency thay sound better than tube at a fraction of the cost.
But I think that experiments with different PSU are of extreme importance. PSU, and in particular the transformers, affect sound consistency in a drammatic way. I had many experience with that.
I would be very interested to listen to an UCD with C-cores form Lundhal
http://www.lundahl.se/
the best that I am aware of. Now I cannot spend more money otherwise my wife ask for divorce 🙂, but as soon as I can I want to try!
Cheers,
KEPha
How about "O" Core transformers?
I've never had a change to listen but they are assumably even better than R-core.
I've a link to a supplier (pretty close to italy)
If you have sufficient power for your UCD400 with 37Volts of your tranny they have also 650VA R-cores but I guess they will make whatever you require
http://www.hifituning.ch/transfor.htm
I've never had a change to listen but they are assumably even better than R-core.
I've a link to a supplier (pretty close to italy)
If you have sufficient power for your UCD400 with 37Volts of your tranny they have also 650VA R-cores but I guess they will make whatever you require
http://www.hifituning.ch/transfor.htm
That's ok, but please read carefully. I am not an English speaker but I think was not so unclear, again you missed somenthing. Le us see:
because as I said before there are people that belives that with the volume's knob in the very first 20 degrees of its rotation, the 400 sounded better. We didn't belive that and we try to find out.
again: if you are aware of a good R-Core with 42/45 V secondaries and at least 500Va, please let us now.
as soon as we have good trafos for the 400 wi will let you know.
I already admitted that I made a mistake.
where?
read the original post: I was talking about the two configurations, I have never said that the MODULE sound different. I think they sound equal with equal PSU topology.
very with that. I suggest to everyone to make experiments with different trafos. It will be surprising if you have thoght that toroids are the best think you can get. That is false. And it also false that Caps play a big role, at least they do not has impact greater then tranforrmes. I have being doing these comparisons from months. I started to do it when I had the problem to supply a NAIM 42.5 (great stuffs).
I hope to hear from you gain,
KEPha
indoubt said:
No experience with that.
I would personally go for C-cores. I know them...great stuffs.
this is my supplier, serious and perfect! It's R-core are over the top. It doesn't wound on order unless you require something more than 5 pieces. The 37Volts you mentionare not realistic for the 400. You need more.
Bye
KEPha
Well, you should of course never directly believe what they write on a website but this is what they say:
"O-Core Trafos":
Absolutes High-End-Material! Für Endstufen kennen wir keine besseren Transformatoren...!
(in English: for power amplifiers we do not know any better)
That is why I was "refferring to it as: assumably even better
I do not have experience (yet) with both C, O and R cores.
"O-Core Trafos":
Absolutes High-End-Material! Für Endstufen kennen wir keine besseren Transformatoren...!
(in English: for power amplifiers we do not know any better)
That is why I was "refferring to it as: assumably even better
I do not have experience (yet) with both C, O and R cores.
Good Post KEPha
Have you listened to the Naim amps?
I currently have an AvondaleNCC200 amp, I'm ordering a pair of UCD modules soon and wondered how the UCD180 compare against something like the NCC200 which is based on the Nap series amps
Have you listened to the Naim amps?
I currently have an AvondaleNCC200 amp, I'm ordering a pair of UCD modules soon and wondered how the UCD180 compare against something like the NCC200 which is based on the Nap series amps
cowanrg said:
Hi,
I don't know. Usually I don't do experiments like that if I don't have direct experience...it costs money not nuts!
Anyway, I will be away form my desk for a couple of weeks I don't know wether I will be able to reply to posts.
I told you my experience, I hope this encourage experiments with different power supplies, mainly with different transformers. I don't belive what Nypex guys said about the importance of Caps. I strongly believe that sound is much affected buy the topology of the transformers (i.e. the geometry of the core, wound etc.). I think this makes a real difference in sound.
Since I don't think I explained very well the difference between Toroids and R-cores (even better C-core) due to my bed use of I now have a 'chic' metaforae:
Toroids sound = female, Concorde
C-cores/R-cores sound = male, F16
I think this makes a better idea of the word I used erlier (robust sound)
Bye and I wll reed your posts on the topics later,
KEPha
t. said:
Yes I have 42.5/140 and I started to play with psu when I started to build the psu for the 42.5. Follow the www.acoustica.org.co.uk and look for psu, over there you will find good comparisons with R-core, C-core Toroids and different caps.
I played the 180 with the 42.5 (I had big trouble with the DIN connectors, very hard to do good cable due to soldering in extremely small spaces). Excellent stuffs I think. But this is not surprising I think the Naim's Preamp can drive everything and the UCD can be driven by everything...so nice! Naim's guy are very smart becauswe they give impresion that you can play a system only if it is all-naim based. I think this is fals.
I hopo you will do experiment on that. If you do it, please let me know on kephaudio@yahoo.it
Bye for now,
KEPha
Kepha,
I think that the importante of the transformer on sound quality is, sometimes, understated. But it is probably not more important than the capacitor quality, as you said.
Thinking about it, I considered that, for some period of the cycle, the amplifier is draining power directly from the transformer, and the Caps are there just for the ride, and to make the transformer life a little harder(during this period, the transformer is also recharging the cap). On the rest of the cycle, the rectifiers block the transformer communication with the circuit, and the amplifier has to drain all its power from the caps. So, it is quite reasonable to consider that the transformer might be as important as the cap. Actually, it might also require the consideration of the usual power draining levels of the amplifier. the more power is drained in average, the more important is the transformer, cause the charging period get bigger and bigger.
Allan
I think that the importante of the transformer on sound quality is, sometimes, understated. But it is probably not more important than the capacitor quality, as you said.
Thinking about it, I considered that, for some period of the cycle, the amplifier is draining power directly from the transformer, and the Caps are there just for the ride, and to make the transformer life a little harder(during this period, the transformer is also recharging the cap). On the rest of the cycle, the rectifiers block the transformer communication with the circuit, and the amplifier has to drain all its power from the caps. So, it is quite reasonable to consider that the transformer might be as important as the cap. Actually, it might also require the consideration of the usual power draining levels of the amplifier. the more power is drained in average, the more important is the transformer, cause the charging period get bigger and bigger.
Allan
matjans said:
Matjans,
The difference is not that big except that the cross secton is circular, there seem to be certain advantages but I do not know the impact on sonic performance other as what is mentioned on the website. Core saturation seems to be less.
Kepha, do you know where to find C-cores? most of the suppliers do not have them.
general:
Would it make a difference if a torroid has additional screening between primary and secundary and is encapsulated? Would it come closer to R-core?
indoubt said:
HI,
for many years the best was considered
http://www.lundahl.se/
But I am aware of better think produced in Italy for example the now famous Bartolini distributed by
http://www.audiokit.it/ENG/Frames/Introduction1.htm
who also sells Kendeill Caps (very good). The problem is that I find Audiokit a bit expensive, but from what I know is the only one who sells Bartolini's C-core. Notice that Bartolini is a kind of artingianal family company they do not have a web for example. But very well done stuffs. In Englnd I know tha Audionote has good stuffs
http://www.audionote.co.uk/index_comp.htm
but very very expensive. C-core are used in many project with 300B tubes.
I don't know about the other question, sorry. As I said I am not an engineer, I am just audio-addict and experimenter and I am looking for good consistent sound.
Dude,
KEPha
correction
sorry the name is Bartolucci instead of Bartolini, they two popular italian surnames which I always confuse...sorry
ciao
K
sorry the name is Bartolucci instead of Bartolini, they two popular italian surnames which I always confuse...sorry
ciao
K
Power Transformers
This is an interesting thread. I do think we need to be careful here in attributing characteristics to a certain technology when
there will be variations in quality within one type. For example, Mike Elliot formerly of Counterpoint published an article critical of toroidal transformers but changed his mind when he heard a Plitron. Steve McCormack was the same but now likes Plitron transformers so much he offers them as upgrades to his amplifier designs.
A major factor affecting performance will be whether an electrostatic screen is specified with the Toroid or not. Without one there is very little isolation from mains noise, whereas an R- core will have isolation as a result of the spacing between primary and secondary windings.
I suspect different toroidal manufacturers may tolerate higher flux densities for a given va rating than others which may well contribute to inferior results.
Just a few thoughts.
Rob.
This is an interesting thread. I do think we need to be careful here in attributing characteristics to a certain technology when
there will be variations in quality within one type. For example, Mike Elliot formerly of Counterpoint published an article critical of toroidal transformers but changed his mind when he heard a Plitron. Steve McCormack was the same but now likes Plitron transformers so much he offers them as upgrades to his amplifier designs.
A major factor affecting performance will be whether an electrostatic screen is specified with the Toroid or not. Without one there is very little isolation from mains noise, whereas an R- core will have isolation as a result of the spacing between primary and secondary windings.
I suspect different toroidal manufacturers may tolerate higher flux densities for a given va rating than others which may well contribute to inferior results.
Just a few thoughts.
Rob.
My two cents.
Toroidal transformers tightly couple the AC line to the secondary in wideband manner (MORE NOISE) but is possible have an electrostatic shield in toroidal transformers.
Toroidal transformers tend to saturate much more abruptly and need to be over rated by a much larger factor.
The quality of the caps is important.
Hugo
Toroidal transformers tightly couple the AC line to the secondary in wideband manner (MORE NOISE) but is possible have an electrostatic shield in toroidal transformers.
Toroidal transformers tend to saturate much more abruptly and need to be over rated by a much larger factor.
The quality of the caps is important.
Hugo
- Status
- Not open for further replies.