Oh, yes...
If it's not very heavy it's bad...
If it does not cost several thousand $$$$ it's bad...
If it's not big in size, it's bad...
If it is different from your audio fetish it must be bad...
Listening to music with headphones is bad...
MP3 is bad...
Anything except what you do is bad...
Because you never feel that you have enough self stem. You're always fighting to conquer external confirmation of your trends...
MP3 is like MPEG video. Image quality is far from perfect but this does not make any difference in the way you feel acting. In a movie, you know when a kiss or a caress is real and when it is fake, don't you?
Or are you too busy looking for pixel artifacts?
I don't need you at all to feel when what I do is good and when it isn't.
To whom was this post addressed?
If it was me
then let me put clear that my post on MP3 and hearing damage was not meant personally.It was meant in a general sense: when I look around I see kids with MP3 headphones, Iphones or whatever; it is their sound reference.
IMHO it is a lower standard than what we (old guys) were used to (records) when we were young. And it is a proven fact that these low quality earphones cause hearing damage when used hours a day; I don't allow my kids to use them.
Hi,
Interesting topic, this part of the culture, knowledge of real musical instruments and a pair of ears that have spent time (together with the brain) to decode the sounds perfectly.
... but can not be transmitted genetically this knowledge to a new son. (nature does not want to evolve that fast), then ..
MP3-4 and 5, dsp etc. There is no doubt that the future is digital serial, hehe! ... we are all working for it.
Regards
Roberto P.
Interesting topic, this part of the culture, knowledge of real musical instruments and a pair of ears that have spent time (together with the brain) to decode the sounds perfectly.
... but can not be transmitted genetically this knowledge to a new son. (nature does not want to evolve that fast), then ..
MP3-4 and 5, dsp etc. There is no doubt that the future is digital serial, hehe! ... we are all working for it.
Regards
Roberto P.
There's not much wrong with ipads, headphones or MP3 in it self - the problem for most young people is the ***** sound quality of the current popular music they listen to.... When everything is mastered to sound louder than anything else, sound quality suffers badly. And this has nothing to do with MP3, iPad, iPhone or whatever. Yes I agree that music sounded better before, that's why the vast majority of my music collection is more than 15 years old.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sounds like you need to find new friends. Please don't lump me in with that crowd.
My post was addressed to a poisoned way of thinking and feeling, not to somebody in particular.
I know many young people that have a vast knowledge of music from all places and styles around the globe thanks to MP3 and internet. This was just not possible a few decades ago. Lets just ignore mainstream music, I think many of us have gone through that early "I'm looking for something but I don't know what" stage.
btw: I agree that many "sound quality" guys can't actually hold a tune for too long, while people that actually enjoy the emotional content in music have a more realistic concept of "sound quality" (including me)
I know many young people that have a vast knowledge of music from all places and styles around the globe thanks to MP3 and internet. This was just not possible a few decades ago. Lets just ignore mainstream music, I think many of us have gone through that early "I'm looking for something but I don't know what" stage.
btw: I agree that many "sound quality" guys can't actually hold a tune for too long, while people that actually enjoy the emotional content in music have a more realistic concept of "sound quality"
(including me)
Last edited:
Chalk it up to some strong spiked cofee!
I didn't realize I went on so long. Sorry
The only other comment I have is that the Hypex modules have ruler flat response down to 10Hz (not shown on the graph but in the specs and as measured by me), down less than 0.5dB at 20K, and only down 3dB at 50kHz.
The bass is EXTREMELY well defined and tight (ultra high damping factor / low output impedance), and the highs are crystal clear with no more distortion than the lower frequencies - distortion is independent of frequency and frequency response is independent of the load down to 2 ohms.
The Tripath chips are the best bang for the buck IMHO, but they are not suitable for a true hi-end hi-fi system, again IMHO. I don't know enough about the other brands to comment.
Sampleaccurate, are there other amp designs you have compared your UCD´s to, and if so, how would you carachterize the audible differences?
BTW which UCD´s are you using, and have they been modded in any way?
Any other comments on how UCD´s are experienced in comparison with other amps, would be greatly appreciated
cheers,
Oh, yes...
If it's not very heavy it's bad...
If it does not cost several thousand $$$$ it's bad...
If it's not big in size, it's bad...
If it is different from your audio fetish it must be bad...
Listening to music with headphones is bad...
MP3 is bad...
Anything except what you do is bad...
Because you never feel that you have enough self stem. You're always fighting to conquer external confirmation of your trends...
MP3 is like MPEG video. Image quality is far from perfect but this does not make any difference in the way you feel acting. In a movie, you know when a kiss or a caress is real and when it is fake, don't you?
Or are you too busy looking for pixel artifacts?
I don't need you at all to feel when what I do is good and when it isn't.
Amen.
The only thing that I disagree with is your comparison of mp3s to MPEGs. Please allow me to explain.
Most of us don't typically watch a movie hundreds of times as we listen to musical compositions (if I had a nickel for every time I listened to Beethoven's 5th...).
That being said, those bad pixels don't get noticed the first time you watch a movie, and maybe not even the second or third. But try watching a medium quality MPEG on a high-def TV 5 or 10 times and you will soon find it UNAVOIDABLE to notice the bad pixels even if you aren't looking for them. But, since most of us never do this, MPEG is fine for movies for almost everyone.
With mp3s, the same holds true but the story is much worse IMHO. They might sound good for a few listens if you aren't used to mp3 data compression. But on a good system, after listening to the same piece many times, you (or at least I do) will begin to hear the artifacts of data compression. Once you know what mp3 data compression sounds like and where in the song it is clearly audible you won't be able to ignore it. You won't have to actively listen for it.
MP3 is the worst thing to happen to audio in the history of audio. The ONLY thing mp3s did was bring music to the masses from all over the world via computers A FEW YEARS EARLIER THAN IT WOULD HAVE OCCURRED WITHOUT DATA COMPRESSION, and now we're stuck with it forever as a result of our "impatience".
You can find almost anything in uncompressed FLAC now, and they sound MUCH better than mp3s to my ears. Why would I watch a DVD if I have the same movie in BluRay (assuming they cost the same)? By the same token, why would I listen to an mp3 when I can get the same song in FLAC and to my ears the FLAC sounds SOOOOO much better. No "shattering glass" effect (that's what I hear on mp3s - it sounds like glass shards being dropped on the floor, the level depending on the bit rate and quality of the encoder). "Chewed up treble" would be another way I would describe it. There are other effects that I can't put into words, the worst being bandwidth limitation at lower bit rates or by purposefully truncating the treble during encoding.
If you find mp3s sound as good as CDs and the data compression doesn't annoy you then you are very lucky. I'm stuck with a good pair of ears. I don't listen for "problems" (the equivalent of looking for bad MPEG pixels), I just hear them, I can't help it, and it degrades my enjoyment of the song when listening on a good system. For the car radio, compress all you want for the road noise will mask most of the faults. But when I spend $$$ on a good system to faithfully reproduce quality recordings, mp3s are simply a way to tell if I like a song. If I do, I get the CD or the FLAC for my actual listening enjoyment. An mp3 simply will not do.
And yes, all classes of amps will soon effectively be "dead" (less than 1% of the market) except class D which will effectively "take over". Fortunately high quality class D amps are a step up in sound quality IMHO, and thank God I can at some point in the future get rid of my tube amps!
Anybody want to buy about $5K worth of tube amps and parts? The fact I can switch from very expensive class A tube amps to class D after a few weeks of listening tests I think proves I have no agenda here other than the pursuit of good sound quality, and that means different things to different people.
No, it doesn't take hi-fi sound to enjoy a song. Some of the most emotional responses I've had to music occurred when listening to a cheap radio. With the right song at the right time - sound quality doesn't really matter. But for repeated listening in an environment designed to reproduce sound accurately for serious listening (when you close you eyes and feel as if the players are right in front of you) mp3 is worthless at the typical bit rates used. 320kbps isn't bad, but it's still noticeably inferior to uncompressed audio.
The only GOOD thing about mp3s is they stopped the record companies from raping the consumer. That would have gone on for 6 or 7 more years had mp3 not come along, but if mp3 would never have been developed we would all be listening to the same songs from all over the world that we do now, but uncompressed and un-degraded.
Recording studios now use 192kHz 24bit recorders, and then the final master is data compressed down to almost one-one hundredth the size of the digital master. I'm not saying music should be distributed in 192kHz 24 bit, but I think 44.1kHz 16 bit isn't too much to ask. mp3s just throw away too much information, again IMHO. But whatever works for each individual is the way to go. Live and let live.
Sorry this got so long again.
I'd add that our ears are much more sensitive than our eyes. Think of the audio spectrum at 20 to 14,000 Hz compared to 400nm to 700nm. We're discussing 16 bits as barely covering the dynamic range our ears are capable of. (30 to 125 dB give or take)
Our eyes are only sensitive to a dynamic range of 10 bits for green (the most sensitive bandwidth) with reductions for both red and blue shift to about 8 bits.
Our eyes are only sensitive to a dynamic range of 10 bits for green (the most sensitive bandwidth) with reductions for both red and blue shift to about 8 bits.
Well, if you're gonna be long-winded, at least have something to say. You've stated a reasonable point of view, sampleaccurate, though I might not be in 100% agreement.
Your "shattering glass" analogy is a good one. And it's ironic that while digital amps are bringing hi-fi within easier reach, the easier-reach digital audio sources are becoming less hi-fi. I'll have to chalk that up to the give and take world we live in.
To me all digital audio is by definition "lossy." There is no infinite sample rate. So each listener decides what is acceptable.
Your "shattering glass" analogy is a good one. And it's ironic that while digital amps are bringing hi-fi within easier reach, the easier-reach digital audio sources are becoming less hi-fi. I'll have to chalk that up to the give and take world we live in.
To me all digital audio is by definition "lossy." There is no infinite sample rate. So each listener decides what is acceptable.
Most people here don't have a global vision about what is going on with audio across the world.
Exotic high-end is a ridiculously tiny market supported by very few people, very enthusiastic and making a lot of noise
Tubes for audio are extinct except in guitar/bass amplifiers where they are still massively in use.
Class A for audio is extinct now. The amount of new products and potential customers is negligible.
High power class AB is going to be extinct soon.
21st century speakers will have built in class D amplifiers and DSP.
I don't believe that only the older generation is interested in audio. A lot of people have been turned off by how much snake oil was created for the "audiofools". Don't you know all amps, speakers and wires sound the same? Also, a lot of young people who were interested in audio started in the first place they could, their cars. Unfortunately, the "older crowd" didn't like these new loud cars and worked hard to create laws to fight them. There are other issues of course but these two things have greatly impacted the audio industry. People don't think twice about spending $2500 on a TV but if you suggest that price for a pair of speakers people think your nuts.
I don't think AB is going to be extinct soon but I do think that D is the future which is why I started this thread. There are a lot of upsides to class D amps but right now they seem to come at a cost, top of the line sound quality. I think this will change in the near future, we are close it seems, but we aren't there yet.
I don't have time to rebut all your incorrect assertions but the UcD180ST (the least expensive Hypex module) has 0.2% distortion at 100 watts and less than 1% at 180 watts. Where you get 15% "switching distortion" I have no idea. Please enlighten us.
And please stop misrepresenting the specs of the Hypex. Your statement is simply wrong. Look at the data sheets.
And so is the complexity of the build time of the two amps.
Please list ALL of the components needed for the F5 and their prices.
I will do that for the Hypex module based amp here:
Modules: $200 for two UcD180ST
SMPS: $90 for 700 watts of power (Meanwell 48 volt SMPS)
Chassis: Hammond aluminum chassis 17" x 10" x 3" $50
Input and speaker connectors: approx $15
Wire: $3
Total cost: $358
The build is far simpler than the F5 and anyone who has built many amps and is familiar with both these amps knows it. The Hypex in an aluminum chassis needs no heatsink other than the chassis itself. The build time is a few hours.
If you would be so kind to back up your assertions by listing the prices of all of the F5 components your argument would be a lot stronger. You can say anything you want, but unless you back it up it's simply an uninformed opinion. Count the number of solder joints in each amp and then tell us the F5 is just as easy to build. Not even close from "scratch".
No offense intended, but please back up your statements with facts.
Last edited:
I agree. But remember, actually class D amps are completely analog, at least most of them including the the self oscillating type. An infinite sample rate is not necessary. There is a theorem called the Nyquist theorem that mathematically proves that any signal that is sampled at at least twice the frequency of the highest frequency content of the signal can be recovered with no degradation assuming an adequate bit depth. Class D amps have no bit depth limitation because they are analog. They have theoretically infinite bit depth with no quantization.
However, the sampling rate of class D amps is typically MUCH higher than digital processors. The Hypex runs at about 400kHz. That's over twice the 192kHz professional standard for digital recording and over 8 times that of a CD! And remember, it's completely analog. The pulse width is an analog quantity and there is ZERO quantization of the signal as in digital processors. It's an analog amp, it just works in a different way.
Last edited:
I wholeheartedly agree. In another few years the prices will drop significantly.
i've replaced the output filter capwith 680nF tin foil KP one
for smaller cap , you can use PPS ( polyphenil-sulfide) one
I looked over it last night. This mod just doesn't make any sense to me. There's already a good quality WIMA polyprop cap there, at least on my UcD modules.
Then its more interesting to bypass the input caps to make the modules DC-coupled, provided you understand the risks and are willing to take them. The simple way of doing this is to solder wire on the rear side of the board to short-circuit the caps. Which caps are shown below:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Attachments
Last edited:
Sorry, but I could resist:
F5 build
2x F5 kit 49,99$ DELUXE F5 STEREO FET & MOSFET AUDIO POWER AMPLIFIER KIT en venta en eBay.es (finaliza el 05-abr-11 03:47:29 H.Esp)
1x Power supply 39,99 LOW COST POWER SUPPLY BOARD FOR 2 X PASS F5 POWER AMP! | eBay
2 x Rectifier 2$ 50 Amp 50A 1000V Metal Case Bridge Rectifier KBPC5010 en venta en eBay.es (finaliza el 23-mar-11 14:41:57 H.Esp)
1x Transformer Antek AN-4218: 44$ Antek - AN-4218
1x Chassis (4U 300mm): 145$ modushop.biz
Cable and hardware: 3$
Total 284,58 + shipping
P.S. The solder joints are the spice of our hobby
F5 build
2x F5 kit 49,99$ DELUXE F5 STEREO FET & MOSFET AUDIO POWER AMPLIFIER KIT en venta en eBay.es (finaliza el 05-abr-11 03:47:29 H.Esp)
1x Power supply 39,99 LOW COST POWER SUPPLY BOARD FOR 2 X PASS F5 POWER AMP! | eBay
2 x Rectifier 2$ 50 Amp 50A 1000V Metal Case Bridge Rectifier KBPC5010 en venta en eBay.es (finaliza el 23-mar-11 14:41:57 H.Esp)
1x Transformer Antek AN-4218: 44$ Antek - AN-4218
1x Chassis (4U 300mm): 145$ modushop.biz
Cable and hardware: 3$
Total 284,58 + shipping
P.S. The solder joints are the spice of our hobby
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.