The HG Supply is only setup for two channels. You either need two HG supplies or our MCH five channel supply.
Vasestar said:How does one connect 4 pcs 180 modules to the HG PSU as earlier stated.? (cant remember the page).?? And how large a transformer would be needed for 4 modules .?
You can connect 4 pcs UcD180 on a HG power supply, however you will not have on all four modules a DC sensing, only on two. Or you can do a small tweak to add some components on the HG supply. You could mail with support (at) hypex . nl , for the details. A power transformer of 300~400VA will be sufficient.
For a more channel solution you could of course use the power supply board of DIYcable.com
Regards,
Jan-Peter
Apologies in advance if this has already been asked, and I have had a good look through this thread (although I must confess to not reading all 1982 posts!!).
Th UcD 180 manual pdf shows a 5A fuse in line with both +ve and -ve DC rails. Assuming that there is no component failure on the UcD 180 pcb itself, what happens if one of the DC fuses fails?
Does the other fuse automatically fail, before any damage can occur to the amplifier components.
Does it not fail, and leave the amplifier in a low current 'safe' state?
Does it not fail, and leave the amplifier in a 'high' current, but non destructive, state?
Or is it possible to destroy the module?
I have an application where more than one power amplifier is required to share the same power supply, and it is useful to know how much extra power, if any, is likely to be drawn in the caes of a single fuse failure.
Th UcD 180 manual pdf shows a 5A fuse in line with both +ve and -ve DC rails. Assuming that there is no component failure on the UcD 180 pcb itself, what happens if one of the DC fuses fails?
Does the other fuse automatically fail, before any damage can occur to the amplifier components.
Does it not fail, and leave the amplifier in a low current 'safe' state?
Does it not fail, and leave the amplifier in a 'high' current, but non destructive, state?
Or is it possible to destroy the module?
I have an application where more than one power amplifier is required to share the same power supply, and it is useful to know how much extra power, if any, is likely to be drawn in the caes of a single fuse failure.
I think if either rail fuse would blow it's very likely oscillation would simply cease immediatly with no harm done to the module.
You'd probably want to give each module its own rail fuses, but that's all up to you.
The modules are overcurrent protected, so the purpose of those fuses is actually in case of an output stage fault, kind of cheap CD protection.
In either case, should the module be fine as you say and just one fuse blows, the output would be left in a state of high impedance, disabled, and so the other fuse should not blow. I haven't tried it to know though.
You'd probably want to give each module its own rail fuses, but that's all up to you.
The modules are overcurrent protected, so the purpose of those fuses is actually in case of an output stage fault, kind of cheap CD protection.
In either case, should the module be fine as you say and just one fuse blows, the output would be left in a state of high impedance, disabled, and so the other fuse should not blow. I haven't tried it to know though.
mr_push_pull said:I enlarged the holes in the heatsinks of my UCDs with a drill, so screws could fit in, and... just one slip and the drill touched one of the caps... I'm attaching a (close-up) pic with the damage. Do you think it's safe to use them like this?
It looks like you just scratched some of the plastic sleeving off, as long as the actual metal cap body does not short out on anything it should be fine.
I skin all electrolytic caps (where suitable) anyway🙂
Well... not quite. The metal is not just scratched, there's a conic hole about half a millimeter of depth. It's hard to tell from the pic, because of the angle (the T-shaped sink wouldn't allow me other angle), and because of the lighting.t. said:
It looks like you just scratched some of the plastic sleeving off, as long as the actual metal cap body does not short out on anything it should be fine.
I skin all electrolytic caps (where suitable) anyway🙂
mr_push_pull said:
Well... not quite. The metal is not just scratched, there's a conic hole about half a millimeter of depth. It's hard to tell from the pic, because of the angle (the T-shaped sink wouldn't allow me other angle), and because of the lighting.
Sorry to hear that, if the can is pierced then I would think they will need changing I'm afraid🙁
You'd have to check first to be sure but would it be possible to either stick a bit of super glue or something to make the cap air tight? if its only a small hole it may be possible to cover it😀
mr_push_pull said:
Well... not quite. The metal is not just scratched, there's a conic hole about half a millimeter of depth. It's hard to tell from the pic, because of the angle (the T-shaped sink wouldn't allow me other angle), and because of the lighting.
Here's the local farnell distributor, just order some Panasonic FC caps to replace those:
http://www.protehno.ro/
Search on uk.farnell.com for size and voltage, then email the guys with the order code, the order will come through prioripost ramburs.
Hai noroc 😛
No, no, no... it's not pierced (that you can see from the picture) 🙂t. said:
Sorry to hear that, if the can is pierced then I would think they will need changing I'm afraid🙁
You'd have to check first to be sure but would it be possible to either stick a bit of super glue or something to make the cap air tight? if its only a small hole it may be possible to cover it😀
Maybe the term "hole", isn't appropriate, maybe "dip" or "pit" is the word. It's not pierced, but it's about 0.5 mm in depth (I didn't realize until now that the cans are so thick). Anyway, I'll power it up and see... let's hope it doesn't explode.
Is there anything to be gained from using the UCD400 over the UCD180 apart from the power output?
I have fairly sensitive speakers and am wanting to go active (4 amps is total)
Thanks in advance
JRKO🙂
I have fairly sensitive speakers and am wanting to go active (4 amps is total)
Thanks in advance
JRKO🙂
JRKO said:Is there anything to be gained from using the UCD400 over the UCD180 apart from the power output?
I have fairly sensitive speakers and am wanting to go active (4 amps is total)
Thanks in advance
JRKO🙂
My experience - > 6 months with UcD180, approx. 200 hours with UcD400 - there is nothing to choose between 'em other than power output and heat dissipation (400 dumps more heat, even when idling).
Regards,
Keith
Thanks KeithC.
So it seems that unlike solid state amps these dont need to be all manly with huge power outputs to get a good grip on the driver?
I have previously tried the Sonic Impact amp and these were fine (all be it with the well documented weak bass performance) so I guess the extra 70-80 Watts into 8ohms wont hurt 😀
So it seems that unlike solid state amps these dont need to be all manly with huge power outputs to get a good grip on the driver?
I have previously tried the Sonic Impact amp and these were fine (all be it with the well documented weak bass performance) so I guess the extra 70-80 Watts into 8ohms wont hurt 😀
I drive Lowthers - normally within the bottom watt of whatever amplifier.
I find Tripath based amps OK other than soundstage which seems smeared.
Hypex amps give the lowest ambient noise level I have ever found.
Coldamp modules have warmer presentation - giving fuller bass and less mid/high emphasis on my idiosyncratic single drivers.
I have invested in a pair of Brian's 10 watt kits to see if the typically bloated power output of class D has any impact other than psu cost (and to do some smd assembly).
I find Tripath based amps OK other than soundstage which seems smeared.
Hypex amps give the lowest ambient noise level I have ever found.
Coldamp modules have warmer presentation - giving fuller bass and less mid/high emphasis on my idiosyncratic single drivers.
I have invested in a pair of Brian's 10 watt kits to see if the typically bloated power output of class D has any impact other than psu cost (and to do some smd assembly).
I have some 15inch Tannoy Dual Concentrics and am looking to power the bass and treble indipendently using the original crossovers.
Once this is done I wil look at upgrading the crossover - either the components or by making it active.
I am going to have a look at building the amps (power supplies as well) into the cabinets for ultimate WAF. How much and what type of sheilding will the amps and/or drivers need from each other?
Once this is done I wil look at upgrading the crossover - either the components or by making it active.
I am going to have a look at building the amps (power supplies as well) into the cabinets for ultimate WAF. How much and what type of sheilding will the amps and/or drivers need from each other?
Just hooked up my UCD180AD monoblocks in place of Threshold T-200 SS Class-A amp.
The UCD's sound with HG supply is very good. Initially in the first hour of listening I was very blown away. But has anyone noticed that loud snare drum parts are sometimes harsh sounding? Maybe it's just a bad recording. I first noticed it on an Evanescence album which I know is heavily compressed pop junk.
All my classic rock Floyd, Doors, and Yes sound wonderful on it. Yes' Fragile sounded the best I think it ever has.
I should note that I'm using the UCD in a triamp system in the 20-800hz range. Eventually, I'll get around to trying an all UCD triamp system.
What I might be hearing is the disconnect between the sounds of the two different amps.
I know the UCD's are supposed to do well with unregulated power supplies, but would a battery or regulated supply sound better? It seemed to me that a little Tripath sounded it's best hooked to a large lead-acid battery and I wonder if UCD would benefit from that as well.
The UCD's sound with HG supply is very good. Initially in the first hour of listening I was very blown away. But has anyone noticed that loud snare drum parts are sometimes harsh sounding? Maybe it's just a bad recording. I first noticed it on an Evanescence album which I know is heavily compressed pop junk.
All my classic rock Floyd, Doors, and Yes sound wonderful on it. Yes' Fragile sounded the best I think it ever has.
I should note that I'm using the UCD in a triamp system in the 20-800hz range. Eventually, I'll get around to trying an all UCD triamp system.
What I might be hearing is the disconnect between the sounds of the two different amps.
I know the UCD's are supposed to do well with unregulated power supplies, but would a battery or regulated supply sound better? It seemed to me that a little Tripath sounded it's best hooked to a large lead-acid battery and I wonder if UCD would benefit from that as well.
Daveis said:Just hooked up my UCD180AD monoblocks in place of Threshold T-200 SS Class-A amp.
The UCD's sound with HG supply is very good. Initially in the first hour of listening I was very blown away. But has anyone noticed that loud snare drum parts are sometimes harsh sounding? Maybe it's just a bad recording. I first noticed it on an Evanescence album which I know is heavily compressed pop junk.
All my classic rock Floyd, Doors, and Yes sound wonderful on it. Yes' Fragile sounded the best I think it ever has.
I should note that I'm using the UCD in a triamp system in the 20-800hz range. Eventually, I'll get around to trying an all UCD triamp system.
What I might be hearing is the disconnect between the sounds of the two different amps.
I know the UCD's are supposed to do well with unregulated power supplies, but would a battery or regulated supply sound better? It seemed to me that a little Tripath sounded it's best hooked to a large lead-acid battery and I wonder if UCD would benefit from that as well.
Hi Davies,
Thanks for sharing your experience, another conventional amp that capitulated to Class D?
Are your UcD modules modded? I think most people here get rid-off the electrolytic coupling caps and replace them with something else (or remove them completely when they are sure that the pre-amp does not have any DC output). I have the very old UcD180 version with the NE5532 and can thus not remove the coupling caps, I replaced them with BG HQ NX caps (hope have that correct) and use smaller values than the original 22uF as they do not have the handle very low frequencies since I use the UcD180 for mid and tweeters (and UcD400 for the woofers). I replaced the output filter cap (0.68uF cap) with 2 WIMA MKP2 330nF caps in parallel, sounds better to my ears. Also the correct way of grounding seems to make a difference according to some people here on the board. And I also actually think it does, even when using XLR inputs (as I do).
Best regards
Gertjan
My UCD180AD is stock with HG supply. I will try eliminating input caps. My DAC already has them at it's output.
As to whether the UCD180 is better than my Threshold T-200, I will wait until I have 2 more UCD mono-blocks. I've noticed that with an 800hz crossover, dissimilarities between the sounds of amps can be disconcerting even when either amp is good in its own right.
In the first 3 hours of listening, I'd have to say the two amps have more similarities than I expected. Bass is suprisingly similar. The Class-A bass is a bit bloated, yet musical. There's just something a little bit hard about the UCD and I only hear it on sharp drum beats. The T200 amp is more liquid sounding. The UCD is more clear with a blacker background. I like them both. I think they both represent about the best that can be obtained from their respective circuit topologies.
The UCD's are my new summertime amps.
The UCD does take its place as my new Class-D amp of choice beating my Pansonic Equibit and Sonic Impact Tripath. And I will probably be selling my Aleph30 as well.
As to whether the UCD180 is better than my Threshold T-200, I will wait until I have 2 more UCD mono-blocks. I've noticed that with an 800hz crossover, dissimilarities between the sounds of amps can be disconcerting even when either amp is good in its own right.
In the first 3 hours of listening, I'd have to say the two amps have more similarities than I expected. Bass is suprisingly similar. The Class-A bass is a bit bloated, yet musical. There's just something a little bit hard about the UCD and I only hear it on sharp drum beats. The T200 amp is more liquid sounding. The UCD is more clear with a blacker background. I like them both. I think they both represent about the best that can be obtained from their respective circuit topologies.
The UCD's are my new summertime amps.
The UCD does take its place as my new Class-D amp of choice beating my Pansonic Equibit and Sonic Impact Tripath. And I will probably be selling my Aleph30 as well.
- Home
- Amplifiers
- Class D
- UCD180 questions