Duck-Twacy said:
No, Jan-Peter refers to his own amps (UcD) that you can find at www.hypex.nl (I`m not paid by Jan-Peter to post this link). I have experience with both ZAppulse (2.2SE) and UcD180. for my application the ZAPpulse was too noise to drive a tweeter and a midrange directly. The UcD modules have an extremely low noise level so you can hook them up directly to a tweeter.
Best regards
Gertjan
Yes, it was a joke 😉
Actually it was a reaction on;
....................??????????????????????
Jan-Peter
Actually it was a reaction on;
....................??????????????????????
Jan-Peter
If your source can provide true balanced output, then use the balanced input on the ZAP. It's simple and it will offer better rejection of noise like you say. There will be no bass loss unless there is something wrong with how you wire it up.
sync of multiple modules
Hi.
Lars recommends to wire up all the clips on the modules inductors to power gnd. Ive attached a page in danish, but look at the end of the page for 2 pictures.
Ive have some hum-probs in my sub, using 2 bridges pulses. My Pioneer 2011 receiver seems to be the cause. Ive already put interconnects ground to powergnd, but that didnt do the trick. Pointers anyone??
Kind regards Per.
http://www.hifi4all.dk/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=14836&KW=PHN2&TPN=1
Hi.
Lars recommends to wire up all the clips on the modules inductors to power gnd. Ive attached a page in danish, but look at the end of the page for 2 pictures.
Ive have some hum-probs in my sub, using 2 bridges pulses. My Pioneer 2011 receiver seems to be the cause. Ive already put interconnects ground to powergnd, but that didnt do the trick. Pointers anyone??
Kind regards Per.
http://www.hifi4all.dk/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=14836&KW=PHN2&TPN=1
Is it true or just.....
Hi,
I was ordered two 2.2SE modules and I've got them at the end of 2004.
As I was setting up them I measured the output power using dummy load, generator and oscilloscope.
I have find that the modules can't give more current than about 10 ampers and then the protection is on. I also was playing with 2 ohm load just before the the current limiting was on and the module burned.... ( the Resistors in seriell with the PSU +/- rails dissipates well ower thei ratings!!!!!)
So I really don't know how any can write RMS Power ratings for this amps when they can't do it???
Any toughts?
What do you think, when I send the broken module back, would i get a new one?????
Best,
Tamas
Hi,
I was ordered two 2.2SE modules and I've got them at the end of 2004.
As I was setting up them I measured the output power using dummy load, generator and oscilloscope.
I have find that the modules can't give more current than about 10 ampers and then the protection is on. I also was playing with 2 ohm load just before the the current limiting was on and the module burned.... ( the Resistors in seriell with the PSU +/- rails dissipates well ower thei ratings!!!!!)
So I really don't know how any can write RMS Power ratings for this amps when they can't do it???
Any toughts?
What do you think, when I send the broken module back, would i get a new one?????
Best,
Tamas
Is it true or just.....
Hi,
I was ordered two 2.2SE modules and I've got them at the end of 2004.
As I was setting up them I measured the output power using dummy load, generator and oscilloscope.
I have find that the modules can't give more current than about 10 ampers and then the protection is on. I also was playing with 2 ohm load just before the the current limiting was on and the module burned.... ( the Resistors in seriell with the PSU +/- rails dissipates well ower thei ratings!!!!!)
So I really don't know how any can write RMS Power ratings for this amps when they can't do it???
Any toughts?
What do you think, when I send the broken module back, would i get a new one?????
Best,
Tamas
Hi,
I was ordered two 2.2SE modules and I've got them at the end of 2004.
As I was setting up them I measured the output power using dummy load, generator and oscilloscope.
I have find that the modules can't give more current than about 10 ampers and then the protection is on. I also was playing with 2 ohm load just before the the current limiting was on and the module burned.... ( the Resistors in seriell with the PSU +/- rails dissipates well ower thei ratings!!!!!)
So I really don't know how any can write RMS Power ratings for this amps when they can't do it???
Any toughts?
What do you think, when I send the broken module back, would i get a new one?????
Best,
Tamas
ericpeters said:
No they were not broken, I tried 4 of them and they all performed the same. Did not matter whether I used only one amp or two of them mounted close together. The noise level was similar as a Tripath based amp that I also have lying around, so the noise level is not very high but with my tweeters driven directly by the ZAPpulse, it is audible at the listening position. With the UcD, they are far more silent. Anyway, Lars Claussen himself acknowledged the noise issue himself and now he has two versions, one with lower noise, and therefore a lower input impedance.
Best regards
Gertjan
ghemink said:
If you don't here anything at all, it maybe because the module has not started oscillating, sometimes, when you apply power to the modules, they don't start oscillating, when you pat on the woofer or send some music to the module, it will start working and you should be able to hear the noise.
Gertjan
ghemink said:
I can hear music, no problem. But when I turn down the volume: No noise, hiss, humm or anything. And I am very picky about these things! I'm pretty sure if you hear any hiss from the module, either it is broken or the source/pre-amp you have connected is not a good match for the amp.
Hi Eric and Gertjan,
At this point of the debate, perhaps it would be of some use to compare speakers?
Regards
At this point of the debate, perhaps it would be of some use to compare speakers?
Regards
some more explenation
I mentioned this before in other threads as well:
I have had one module that had a hiss noise as well. At that time I thought that this was caused by the ground loops as a result of 2 monoblocks. But the other module did not have the noise. In fact I swithced everything moved everything around but alsways the noise came from the same moduel.
I had send the module back to LC-audio and told them the Module was defect. I got the module back with the story: Nothing is wrong with it. So I got angry and got on the phone with Lars, as a result he send me a new module which was ok and silent.
I normally run the modules on apogee's which are low impedance, low sensitivity. But for testing I also put them on cheap high efficiency speakers: still no noise.
I drive them with a Krell KSL in balanced mode (Maybe that's the difference) and the only problem I got is too much gain. so I can only use the 1st quarter of the volume control to avoid that the whole street can listen to my system.
The only way when I hear noise is when my MC phono amp is connected.
I mentioned this before in other threads as well:
I have had one module that had a hiss noise as well. At that time I thought that this was caused by the ground loops as a result of 2 monoblocks. But the other module did not have the noise. In fact I swithced everything moved everything around but alsways the noise came from the same moduel.
I had send the module back to LC-audio and told them the Module was defect. I got the module back with the story: Nothing is wrong with it. So I got angry and got on the phone with Lars, as a result he send me a new module which was ok and silent.
I normally run the modules on apogee's which are low impedance, low sensitivity. But for testing I also put them on cheap high efficiency speakers: still no noise.
I drive them with a Krell KSL in balanced mode (Maybe that's the difference) and the only problem I got is too much gain. so I can only use the 1st quarter of the volume control to avoid that the whole street can listen to my system.
The only way when I hear noise is when my MC phono amp is connected.
Re: some more explenation
Well this discussion leads to nowhere, if you are happy with the noise level of the ZAPpulse, then that is fine for your application. I was not saying they were very noisy (at least I did not mean to say that), as their noise level is similar as my Tripath based Marantz amp, so they are not necessarily poor performers with respect to noise. I also had 4 modules and they all performed the same, what is the probability that I would get 4 modules that are all exactly wrong in the same way??? Besides that, why would Lars make a special low noise version of the ZAPpulse? Maybe you have the low noise version???
I just described my experience for use of the modules in an active speaker system where they have to drive tweeters directly, so no crossover network that reduces the efficiency a few dB. In that case, it becomes clear that the UcD have lower noise level, at least in comparison with the standard ZAPpulse 2.2SE and I need that to drive my tweeters directly. The problem is not in the pre-amp since even with nothing connected, the UcD has a lower noise level than the ZAPpulse. In fact, with the preamp connected, the noise level is determined by the preamp in the case of the UcD while it was determined by the ZAPpulse in the case I used the ZAPpulse.
Besides that, there were a couple of other reasons that I prefer UcD over the ZAPpulse (also described in other threads). One of the reasons is the switching off behavior of the ZAPpulse. If you connect it to a woofer and switch off the amp, you can see the cone moving quite a bit with a very low frequency during switch-of, you also get a lot of whistling sound during switch-off. I did not like those sounds and most of all, I did not like those low frequencies during switch-off going to my tweeters. I even got AM radio reception on my ZAPpulse during switch-off, really amazing, others have reported things like this as well.
Anyway, I think a lot of these effects have been fixed in the 2.3 version, so all the issues/limitations that I have experienced may not be an issue anymore.
Best regards
Gertjan
ericpeters said:
Well this discussion leads to nowhere, if you are happy with the noise level of the ZAPpulse, then that is fine for your application. I was not saying they were very noisy (at least I did not mean to say that), as their noise level is similar as my Tripath based Marantz amp, so they are not necessarily poor performers with respect to noise. I also had 4 modules and they all performed the same, what is the probability that I would get 4 modules that are all exactly wrong in the same way??? Besides that, why would Lars make a special low noise version of the ZAPpulse? Maybe you have the low noise version???
I just described my experience for use of the modules in an active speaker system where they have to drive tweeters directly, so no crossover network that reduces the efficiency a few dB. In that case, it becomes clear that the UcD have lower noise level, at least in comparison with the standard ZAPpulse 2.2SE and I need that to drive my tweeters directly. The problem is not in the pre-amp since even with nothing connected, the UcD has a lower noise level than the ZAPpulse. In fact, with the preamp connected, the noise level is determined by the preamp in the case of the UcD while it was determined by the ZAPpulse in the case I used the ZAPpulse.
Besides that, there were a couple of other reasons that I prefer UcD over the ZAPpulse (also described in other threads). One of the reasons is the switching off behavior of the ZAPpulse. If you connect it to a woofer and switch off the amp, you can see the cone moving quite a bit with a very low frequency during switch-of, you also get a lot of whistling sound during switch-off. I did not like those sounds and most of all, I did not like those low frequencies during switch-off going to my tweeters. I even got AM radio reception on my ZAPpulse during switch-off, really amazing, others have reported things like this as well.
Anyway, I think a lot of these effects have been fixed in the 2.3 version, so all the issues/limitations that I have experienced may not be an issue anymore.
Best regards
Gertjan
Re: Re: some more explenation
Sounds like the answer!
Yep I have those as well, in my case with the passive corssover it is something I find hindering, but not dangerous. (Actively it would bother me as well) It does not seem to degrade the sound during normal operation. However it also demonstrates that the noise level depends on the Power supply.
I heard the 2.3 once and didn't like it (Harsch treble), I tend to think it is the Black Gate on the 2.2 that makes the difference.
I need to test the UCD's in my environment as well, the original reason why I not chose them was because of the power rating and current capacity. But also I had heard the Zaps and found them excellen.
I also have B&O Ice modules but find them quite tricky when it comes to making a good PS.
ghemink said:
Sounds like the answer!
Yep I have those as well, in my case with the passive corssover it is something I find hindering, but not dangerous. (Actively it would bother me as well) It does not seem to degrade the sound during normal operation. However it also demonstrates that the noise level depends on the Power supply.
I heard the 2.3 once and didn't like it (Harsch treble), I tend to think it is the Black Gate on the 2.2 that makes the difference.
I need to test the UCD's in my environment as well, the original reason why I not chose them was because of the power rating and current capacity. But also I had heard the Zaps and found them excellen.
I also have B&O Ice modules but find them quite tricky when it comes to making a good PS.
Re: Re: Re: some more explenation
I would be very interested in what you think of the UcD modules, I like them a lot, I replaced a few of the caps on the UcD with black gates and added some black gate decoupling caps close to the input opamp. I have no before/after comparison of with/without black gate, just know they sound wonderful. I never was much of a believer in effects of burn-in, however, it seems they sound even better after a couple of months. Could also be that I got used to them of course 🙂
A comparison with ICEpower would be nice as well. I don't like it so much because I don't like the fact that half of the power supply voltage is present at the speaker connectors. Besides that, the ICEpower modules freq. response is far more dependent on the speaker load than that of the UcD. Having said that, I have never heard ICEpower, so I don't know anything about how they sound.
Best regards
Gertjan
ericpeters said:
I would be very interested in what you think of the UcD modules, I like them a lot, I replaced a few of the caps on the UcD with black gates and added some black gate decoupling caps close to the input opamp. I have no before/after comparison of with/without black gate, just know they sound wonderful. I never was much of a believer in effects of burn-in, however, it seems they sound even better after a couple of months. Could also be that I got used to them of course 🙂
A comparison with ICEpower would be nice as well. I don't like it so much because I don't like the fact that half of the power supply voltage is present at the speaker connectors. Besides that, the ICEpower modules freq. response is far more dependent on the speaker load than that of the UcD. Having said that, I have never heard ICEpower, so I don't know anything about how they sound.
Best regards
Gertjan
why not replaced the 2.3 caps with black gate ?
I have a 2.2SE and i order a 2.3 SE, I could compare both, and why not, replace caps on the 2.3 fto make a better sound.
Best regards.
Seb
I have a 2.2SE and i order a 2.3 SE, I could compare both, and why not, replace caps on the 2.3 fto make a better sound.
Best regards.
Seb
Re: Re: Re: Re: some more explenation
If what I've read about BG's are correct, you might find them sounding even better after a couple more months yet, and should you try swapping them around either in the circuit or say to another module, they'll again take several months to "re-burn" in.
Hm, owners of any ZaPpulse that comes with them should be well aware of that too.
Really, a couple months is way too long, they should have been able to refine that somehow?
There's got to be some other high quality cap that doesn't take forever to burn in.
Regards
ghemink said:
If what I've read about BG's are correct, you might find them sounding even better after a couple more months yet, and should you try swapping them around either in the circuit or say to another module, they'll again take several months to "re-burn" in.
Hm, owners of any ZaPpulse that comes with them should be well aware of that too.
Really, a couple months is way too long, they should have been able to refine that somehow?
There's got to be some other high quality cap that doesn't take forever to burn in.
Regards
It happend again my new 2.2 SE module died just like the other one,somebody who can tell me what happens.I shut down the amplifier and changed signal cable and "poff", right channel starts blinking heavily on the led when i start up.A really strong "humming" in the right speaker,i measure on the speaker connectors and get DC 72,5V no wonder the speaker is "humming".Belive it or not but this time the speaker survived and it was a really cheap MGR Woofer.The original rediculus expensive Vifa burned up in no time( Martin Logan SL3) the first time my module broke.I replaced the burned Vifa with the cheap MGR waiting to raise the money to buy a new Vifa,but maybe i keep the cheap one instead.Did i remove the cable to fast or what? Really sensitive modules.Anyone that can give me a hint what is wrong?
/ Sven-Åke
/ Sven-Åke
- Status
- Not open for further replies.