Chipamp or my NAD

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
N

nvrgdenuf

Member
Joined 2006
#1
I am sure there have been similar posts but I can't find them. I am thinking of making multiple channel amps for 3-way active speakers and wondering about comparisons of the chipamps to the likes of my NAD, a Rotel or similar. Sound quality, driver control, sonics, dynamics etc.. I just can't seem to find any comparisons.
I am using HawthorneAudio open baffle drivers in a H/T and listening setup and currently Behringer cx-2310 X-overs.
thanks for you help
nvrgdenuf
 
#2
I'm currently listening to my Hawthorne Duets using a four channel GC for the SI woofers and tweeters. Cost-wise, it is a better option than your NAD IMHO. I haven't heard the NAD but I doubt it is better than what I am listening too now!

A regulated GC will power the Augies but I have to admit that they are better with something with a bit more power - perhaps a bridged GC?
 
#4
The Nad sounds pretty good but I have been kickin' around the GC idea because of the hype. And, like a tinkerer, making a separate enclosure with the amps and Marchand x-overs for each speaker, low profile and custom Birch and aluminum to match the speakers. This would sit on a heavy solid wood or granite slab behind each speaker. I think my biggest concern was control of the speaker cone, simply would the GC have equal to, more/less control than a Bipolar or Mosfet amp? Would it be as dynamic?
thanks
andy
 
#5
This is a good question.
One day, after geeking with DACs, I would like to get into amplifiers.
I probably will start with a chip amp as its simpler than a discrete amp, and I'm interested in bi-amping, so it should be a cheap way to play with active crossovers, but I do like the challenge of building a discrete amp one day.
I suspect the reason why chipamps punch above their weight (especially perhaps with regards to something like a NAD) s because it gives more time and money to the builder to concentrate the power supply.

However, I do wonder how it would compare to a discrete class AB or B amplifier.
And if one competes well, to what sort of level? Better than a NAD 3020? an Audiolab 8000? a Naim NAP250? I don't know many more expensive amplifiers 🙂
 
#6
I think my biggest concern was control of the speaker cone, simply would the GC have equal to, more/less control than a Bipolar or Mosfet amp? Would it be as dynamic?
Click to expand...

In my experience with the regulated GC and the SI's, the answer is yes, and that's with passive crossovers. I can imagine what it would be like with active crossovers and that is what I hope to try for myself soon. And remember, your drivers are not 'fighting' against a 'spring of air' as they are not trapped in a box!

Philpoole, the GC versus discrete amp debate has gone on here for years. It's more a question of 'horses for courses' and when you need 4 or 6 channels for an active speaker project, the chip amp looks a better bet than discrete unless you have unlimited time and money. It says quite a lot if Siegfried Linkwitz is happy with chip amps for his Orion speakers! :att'n:
 
#7
Depends on what kind of NAD and what kind of chipamp. Mauro Penassa's MyRef is alot better to my ears than any of the run of the mill NAD / Rotel amps in the same power range.

A side note though is that it did not do all that well with low impedance loads. In that area I would say that NAD discrete design is better
 
#9
So I ordered a LM4780 kit from Peter. I will hook it up left and with the NAD on the right, we'll see (hear) what happens! With active x-over one board will be tweeter and the mid. The other will be parallel for the woofer. I will have to get the kit to make the signal balanced to bridge the second one. Anyone know which one or where to find it?
Thanks
andy

P.S.
Nuuk,
I will be getting the Radian tweeter for the Si's for this project. I am sure you know about this one from the Hawthorne site. Hopefully 'blows away' the stock tweeter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom