Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I would have to ...
Hello Beppe,
You are the only person who can judge what is the best amp for you. What I can say is that UcD sounds very clean, natural and stays clean and natural at high volume as well. With UcD you may find yourself turning up the volume significantly higher than before because the sound stays clean (as long as your speakers can handle it of course). This is not exclusively true for UcD I believe, I have heard other Class D amps and they have some of this in common with UcD. At least I do not want to listen to anything else anymore.
Best regards
Gertjan
beppe61 said:
Hello Beppe,
You are the only person who can judge what is the best amp for you. What I can say is that UcD sounds very clean, natural and stays clean and natural at high volume as well. With UcD you may find yourself turning up the volume significantly higher than before because the sound stays clean (as long as your speakers can handle it of course). This is not exclusively true for UcD I believe, I have heard other Class D amps and they have some of this in common with UcD. At least I do not want to listen to anything else anymore.
Best regards
Gertjan
You can use an auxiliary psu for the input stage on any of the modules. The 180 and 400 might be a little more work, but no big deal to be honest. With the 700, you just have no choice but to use an aux psu for the input stage, because it doesn't include onboard regulators like the others.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I would have to ...
What I can say is that UcD sounds very clean, natural and stays clean and natural at high volume as well. With UcD you may find yourself turning up the volume significantly higher than before because the sound stays clean
Thank you Mr Gertjan.
Actually this is a very telling test.
Only very good systems allow this.
At least I do not want to listen to anything else anymore.
This is more of an endorsement.
This is more a declaration of love.
Thank you very much.
Kind regards,
beppe
ghemink said:
What I can say is that UcD sounds very clean, natural and stays clean and natural at high volume as well. With UcD you may find yourself turning up the volume significantly higher than before because the sound stays clean
Thank you Mr Gertjan.
Actually this is a very telling test.
Only very good systems allow this.
At least I do not want to listen to anything else anymore.
This is more of an endorsement.
This is more a declaration of love.
Thank you very much.
Kind regards,
beppe
Re: Re: Re: Re: I would have to ...
Hi Alain,
What linear amps did you think were the closest to the UCD?
rha61 said:
Hi Alain,
What linear amps did you think were the closest to the UCD?
classd4sure said:
Thank you sincerely again for the additional and valuable info.
Nevertheless I wonder if, in the case of the model 400, it would be worth the hassle.
I read that in general this is a good practice because isolate the sensitive input stage from any disturb in the voltage rails caused by the power stage drawing current in a no-steady way.
I know of an old power amp (well an integrated amp), the ASR Emitter, that offered EVEN a batteries based PS for the input stages.
Nevertheless I still think that this advantage of having splitted PS could be overrated.
What is your opinion?
Mine is the a "stock" 400 would be more than good enough for any "normal" use.
Thnak you very much again.
Kind regards,
beppe
beppe61 said:
There's only one way to find out right? I've yet to implement the aux supply myself, it's actually very decent just with the onboard regulators. Aux regulators would be a very worthy upgrade though, and not very expensive. See what you think when the time comes.
beppe61 said:
Although the buffer stages normally have higher PSRR, depending on where the split is and how much gain is in this stage, there could be significant differences. We all know how critical the power supply is for preamps in the past, which basically is similar here.
classd4sure said:
There's only one way to find out right?
Right. I do not want to sound lazy.
I am only gathering more info I can.
I am already sold on this technology. Too many positive feedbacks to be a urban legend.
In the next days I will have another listening session with 400.
it's actually very decent just with the onboard regulators.
I did not know about the regulators being on the pcb already.
If only I could get a schematic.
See what you think when the time comes
I think I will use the 400 in the more conventional way.
Thnak you so much.
Kind regards,
beppe
beppe61 said:
Hello Beppe,
The on board regulator is very simple. See attachment. Basically an emitter follower (on the UcD it is actually a power darlington transistor) with a zener stabilized base voltage.
A real voltage regulator would have more feedback and thus have a lower output impedance than this kind of simple regulator. I think I saw datasheets saying that standard voltage regulators have an output impdedance of 0.1 Ohm or so upto 1kHz (going up for higher frequencies).
Best regards
Gertjan
Attachments
ghemink said:
Just a remark, the resistor values in the above schematic are correct (at least for my old UcD400), the 5.4k is actually 2x2.7k in series. Of course the type number of the zener is probably not correct, however, 12V zener diodes are used. The elcap is 22uF and the 100n at the emitter is an questimation. I think newer modules have different values there. I measured something like 11.2V at the emitter of that power darlington.
Best regards
Gertjan
ghemink said:
Thank you very much Mr Gertjan.
I understand that modding the module is beyond my ability.
Feeling myself a little "S" I will follow the KISS approach.
As I said in the next days I will listen, for the 2nd time, to a UcD 400s based power amp.
I sincerely hope this session will confirm my first impression that the UcD 400 modules are more than good enough even in stock form.
I could always try some filtering on the main PS.
thank you very much again.
Kind regards,
beppe
Don't sell yourself short. You can practice your soldering on scrap computer boards or anything to gain some confidence.
You can listen to them stock for awhile and it's more than decent, but if you get the urge to go further later on feel free to contact me anytime I'll give you a hand.
Truth is when you first start, the supply and wiring of it is the biggest deal, and experimenting with that can keep you busy for a long time... unless you buy one.
You can listen to them stock for awhile and it's more than decent, but if you get the urge to go further later on feel free to contact me anytime I'll give you a hand.
Truth is when you first start, the supply and wiring of it is the biggest deal, and experimenting with that can keep you busy for a long time... unless you buy one.
beppe61 said:
Hello Beppe,
Yes, they are good in stock form. However, maybe after a while you start to wonder whether they would even sound better with some modifications 🙂
Maybe you can find someone in the neighborhood that can do the mods for you. I recommend at least to change the input caps (I think in the newer modules they are actually not at the input anymore). It seems most people like to replace or remove those. Note that removing them is only possible when your preamp has no DC at the output. Many preamps already have a capacitor at the output to prevent DC from coming out of the preamp. I recently changed the output filter cap, recommend that as well, some people overhere have been doing that as well. However, probably the input caps give you the biggest improvement.
Best regards
Gertjan
classd4sure said:
I will try to set up one channel at first, even with flying wires.
I will take profit of your very kind offer of help.
My best regards,
beppe
ghemink said:
Yes, they are good in stock form
Dear Gertjan, thanks you for the precious advice.
Maybe you can find someone in the neighborhood that can do the mods for you
, I have a friend who has a desoldering station and he is very more clever than me.
I recommend at least to change the input caps .
probably the input caps give you the biggest improvement.
It seems most people like to replace or remove those
I think I could try at least the mod you mention.
The preamps I use have all cap-coupled outs.
I recently changed the output filter cap, recommend that as well, some people overhere have been doing that as well.
Next step then.
Thanks sincerely again.
My best wishes,
beppe
This was an interesting comparision I though valuable.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1023128#post1023128
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1023128#post1023128
Hi,
me too were curious, after listening to class d, to know about "traditional" amps. The question was: ok this Tripath sounds very good, but enough good to be comparable to a good class A?
My brother is a glad owner of Dr. Klimo Merlin valve pre + 2 mono Dr. Klimo Kent amps. Something like 10000$ ten years ago, still in production.
http://www.dklimo.de
He too was curious about class-d, so he brought these beauties to my home to make comparisons with my UCD180ad and 41hZ AMP5.
Source: hard disk + emu1212m (only for spdif) + external Wolfson DAC
Speakers: FE206E (96dB) in back loaded enclosure.
Music: Classic (my brother is professional violinist)
Amp5 and UCD without pre.
Results?
I make it brief, because each piece we listened to, would require long comments. My amps WERE comparable with valves! Not a minor son or a nice gear to play while "valves are another thing".
UCD180ad was as good as klimo's with clarity, fidelity and precision of sound, more quiet and powerfull, maybe with less resolution.
AMP5 was less precise and quiet than UCD, it is a cheap diy project with basic components. Clarity and fidelity are comparable, maybe a bit less than Klimo, but his best side is detail and dynamics. Here my brother was surprised to hear something he never heard. Lot of details in each single instrument in an orchester that make a stage live. And the dynamic extension in complex passages where an orchester pass from a light sound to big explosions in milliseconds without confusion.
I'd like to compare class-d to Nelson Pass amps. Is there somewhere who did it with Tripath or UCD?
Ciao
Thomas
me too were curious, after listening to class d, to know about "traditional" amps. The question was: ok this Tripath sounds very good, but enough good to be comparable to a good class A?
My brother is a glad owner of Dr. Klimo Merlin valve pre + 2 mono Dr. Klimo Kent amps. Something like 10000$ ten years ago, still in production.
http://www.dklimo.de
He too was curious about class-d, so he brought these beauties to my home to make comparisons with my UCD180ad and 41hZ AMP5.
Source: hard disk + emu1212m (only for spdif) + external Wolfson DAC
Speakers: FE206E (96dB) in back loaded enclosure.
Music: Classic (my brother is professional violinist)
Amp5 and UCD without pre.
Results?
I make it brief, because each piece we listened to, would require long comments. My amps WERE comparable with valves! Not a minor son or a nice gear to play while "valves are another thing".
UCD180ad was as good as klimo's with clarity, fidelity and precision of sound, more quiet and powerfull, maybe with less resolution.
AMP5 was less precise and quiet than UCD, it is a cheap diy project with basic components. Clarity and fidelity are comparable, maybe a bit less than Klimo, but his best side is detail and dynamics. Here my brother was surprised to hear something he never heard. Lot of details in each single instrument in an orchester that make a stage live. And the dynamic extension in complex passages where an orchester pass from a light sound to big explosions in milliseconds without confusion.
I'd like to compare class-d to Nelson Pass amps. Is there somewhere who did it with Tripath or UCD?
Ciao
Thomas
thomaseliot said:
Ciao Thomas,
your UcD 180 modules have been used stock or modified?
I understand that a lot can be gained from slight mods.
I guess you drove the UcD based amp with the Klimo preamp.
Am I right?
Thanks for disclosing your interesting experience.
Kind regards from Torino,
beppe
- Status
- Not open for further replies.