UCD400 or ZAPPulse?

[greg filip]

Hi guys,

I have decided to go for it and build a class-D amplifier. Cost is not an issue, only quality of sound. Sooooo ... do I go for the UCD400 or the ZAPPulse? Any other quality alternatives?

The amp will be used with a transopt into a DAX Decade dac driving the power amp directly. The power amp will be driving Vienna Acoustics Malhers.

Thanks for your help.

Greg.

 

[ghemink]

Hi guys,

I have decided to go for it and build a class-D amplifier. Cost is not an issue, only quality of sound. Sooooo ... do I go for the UCD400 or the ZAPPulse? Any other quality alternatives?

The amp will be used with a transopt into a DAX Decade dac driving the power amp directly. The power amp will be driving Vienna Acoustics Malhers.

Thanks for your help.

Greg.

Hi Greg,

If cost is no issue, then try them both and let us know which one you prefer.

Best regards

Gertjan

 

[greg filip]

OK point taken.

 

[GregD]

I've tried both. The ZAP has a little more power, but I definitely preferred the quality of the sound with the UCD400.

 

[ghemink]

I've tried both. The ZAP has a little more power, but I definitely preferred the quality of the sound with the UCD400.

So there you go. My experience with UcD180 and an earlier Zappulse 2.2SE is also positive in the direction of the UcD. Don`t know anything about the 2.3SE, that`s why I don`t want to make a recommendation.

Gertjan

 

[GregD]

So there you go. My experience with UcD180 and an earlier Zappulse 2.2SE is also positive in the direction of the UcD. Don`t know anything about the 2.3SE, that`s why I don`t want to make a recommendation.

Gertjan

I should have noted that my experience was also with the Zappulse 2.2SE and the UCD400 was the second series with the UCD180 type connections.

 

[kepa1]

if you plan to reclock the zappulse module, then it should sound better than UCD in the highs; at least it 's what i've read in a french forum.

the guy who did it also mentionned that if both amps remained unmodified, then the UCD was the winner.

 

[ghemink]

if you plan to reclock the zappulse module, then it should sound better than UCD in the highs; at least it 's what i've read in a french forum.

the guy who did it also mentionned that if both amps remained unmodified, then the UCD was the winner.

What do you mean by reclocking? Fixing the clock frequency? If you do that, distortion will increase, maybe some people liked the increased distortion?

 

[kepa1]

Ghemink, what i meant is using an external clock to set the PWM frequency up to 800 khz.

It is supposed to "open" the sound in the upper range (Zappulse are set at approx. 500 khz by default).

I really ca't go into further details because I wouldn't like to talk non sense

here is the original French thread

 

[Jan-Peter]

....hm, thanks for the link. Unfortenalty I can not read/understand enough French to understand this......

We have to wait till Bruno is back from his trip to the AES in Barcelona, he is Belgium so he can read and write French!

BTW he will give an AES presentation about the UcD Class-D.

As far as I know reclocking means that the loopgain will be reduce so the distortion will be much increased. Perhaps this gives a nice sound effect????

Jan-Peter

 

[peranders]

J-P, Altavista may be helpful but usually not.

Translation tool here.
http://babelfish.altavista.com/

 

[Lars Clausen]

I think the power supply is a very important factor if you want to make an A/B test with these two very different technologies.
If you were to compare them with different power capacitors and transformers, it would be like comparing apples with bananas.

So in our showroom we have set ups of both UcD400 and ZAPpulse 2.3 with the exact same power supply, and anybody interested can visit, and play with and compare the two technologies.

In my opinion both technologies have good qualities, and since they are very different in sound nature, they will appeal to different people. Since they also cost all but exactly the same, i would say the price could not be the deciding factor.

Listen and find your way ..

About the frequency boosting, in my opinion the sound gets less dynamic and less alive, compared to free running mode. It gets watercombed.....
My personal preference is to have as much musicality, and a holographic precision as possible. The sound should be alive and dynamic. So i would not use freq boosting for my own amplifier. But then some like the mother, while others like the daughter

 

[ghemink]

In my opinion both technologies have good qualities, and since they are very different in sound nature, they will appeal to different people. Since they also cost all but exactly the same, i would say the price could not be the deciding factor.

Listen and find your way ..

So where do they sound different? I can not visit you to listen to do a comparison myself.

I also don`t fully agree that they cost the same. I have seen your calculations on your web-site that suggests so. You also say that yours is the best choice based on a few criteria that do not say much about sound quality to me. However, the UcD400 standard version is clearly cheaper. Also I think the way Hypex charges their costs is better for the consumer. Whether I order 2 or 8 modules, the shipping costs are the same. In ZAPpulse case, the shipping cost is included in each module`s price, obviously when I order 8 ZAPpulses you would be very happy since it saves you lots of shipping costs.

Also about the VAT, this is interesting for outside EU customers like me. When I ordered UcD from Hypex, I did not get charged for VAT. In Japan, tax is much lower so for me it is cheaper to have them send to Japan. I think when in the past I ordered a few ZAPpulses, the VAT was not deducted, but I`m not 100% sure about that anymore, so I maybe wrong.

And what about UcD180? Clearly cheaper than ZAP, no matter how you look at it.

I don`t really like the way you advertise on your web-site, maybe you did this because some others are taking away business from you? I don`t think it looks very professional and some people may not buy your products because of the way you advertise them.

My advise: charge the shipping seperate so that you can lower the price of each single unit. In that way, people that order 8 of them will feel that they don`t pay too much. Mention the VAT also seperate since for many potential customers outside the EU, the excl VAT price is the only interesting thing. This may increase shipments outside the EU?

Best regards and succes

Gertjan

 

[Lars Clausen]

Gertjan: Thank You for your suggestions.

If you were to buy 8 ZAPpulses, you would most probably be eligable for the 20% mass discount, that we offer on top of the page. The mass discount is introduced specificly to solve the problem you mention.

The UcD400 standard edition is cheaper than ZAPpulse Special Edition.
However if you compare UcD400 standard edition with ZAPpulse 2.3 standard edition, i think you will also get a nice balance.

UcD180 vs ZAPpulse ... hmm i think the difference here is too big for a price balance:
(UcD:180W / ZAP:590W it's not the same product range).

But anyway maybe you are right, maybe our way of making a simple price policy without hidden costs, is causing people to buy other products, because it appears our prices are higher.

When in fact they are not higher.

I will think about your suggestions, and maybe change the price marking in the near future.

Thanks

Best regards

Lars

 

[whams]

I don`t really like the way you advertise on your web-site, maybe you did this because some others are taking away business from you? I don`t think it looks very professional and some people may not buy your products because of the way you advertise them.


Gertjan

I completely agree with you Gertjan. I felt exactly the same thing when I read the comparison on the LC Audio website regarding the zaps against the hypex modules (obviously). Products should be able to sell themselves on their own merits and you shouldn't have to resort to this sort of marketing.

I bought zaps intially but I had a failure in one of the modules (my own fault) It wasn't replaced under warrenty as I thought it would have been ...it is clearly stated this way on the LC Audio page (although they do have a clause saying warrenty rules may vary depending on your local dealer) So instead I went the way of the hypex modules....UcD400's.

I must say, having heard both, I reckon the hypex modules are quieter as well. They both did sound good though

And it certainly was cheaper for me to get the UcD's direct from hypex then getting the zaps from my local dealer (LC Audio won't sell direct if your country has a dealer)...so I am not sure when the price argument is coming from.

All in all, I am very happy with hypex and my UcD400's. They sound fantastic!

Dave

 

[Jan-Peter]

Originally posted by Lars Clausen;
But anyway maybe you are right, maybe our way of making a simple price policy without hidden costs, is causing people to buy other products, because it appears our prices are higher.

A small remark;
Hidden cost are cost what you don't show........

We show ALL cost exactly on the webshop; VAT, different option for transport, total weight. We even calculate the weight package and calculate exactly the shippingcost.....

Don't accuse us that we have HIDDEN cost......

Regards,

Jan-Peter

 

[Lars Clausen]

Gertjan: Based on your suggestion, we have now changed our price marking system, so the list prices no longer include VAT and TNT shipping charges. These points are added separately, during the ordering process.

This way we also no longer need the comparing chart, which should hopefully make everybody happy again Now you can compare directly the prices, even if the specs are still not quite the same.

UcD have lower THD according to Jan-Peter, while ZAPpulse 2.3 has higher power spec, more bandwidth and higher Max voltage limit.

All the best to everybody

Lars

 

[matjans]

o come on guys, we're building amps here, not nit-picking marketing strategies of two highly regarded class d amplifier module manufacturers.

If we're smart enough to either construct or use class d amp modules you'd say we'd be able to see through (most of) that marketing stuff.

So far the only things I have heard about the difference in sound quality of the ucd400 and the zappulses are more likely a matter of taste or preference than quality, a few quirks here and there maybe but still.
Add to that that It's pretty much impossible (practically and financially) to compare both modules with a psu that's been optimised for those specific modules, I wouldn't dare saying that one sounds better than the other, even if I had listened to them (i only have hypex amps).

 

[greg filip]

Matjans,

I did not intend to start a war between Hypex and LCAudio. I am sure bith companies are trying to make a living in today's difficult market conditions.

I totally agree with you. This is exactly what I was originally asking - how does the sound differ between the two products? I have heard commercial classD amps and they sounded very different. I compared the TACT and the Belcanto. The TACT sounded very accurate but cold while the BelCanto was sweeter and more musical. So which one of the UCD/ZAP is the more musical?

Regards,

Greg.

 

[ghemink]

Gertjan: Based on your suggestion, we have now changed our price marking system, so the list prices no longer include VAT and TNT shipping charges. These points are added separately, during the ordering process.

This way we also no longer need the comparing chart, which should hopefully make everybody happy again Now you can compare directly the prices, even if the specs are still not quite the same.

UcD have lower THD according to Jan-Peter, while ZAPpulse 2.3 has higher power spec, more bandwidth and higher Max voltage limit.

All the best to everybody

Lars

Hi Lars,

Very nice of you to consider the changes and actually implement them so fast.

Maybe I should send a bill for marketing consulting charges

Best regards and good luck with your business

Gertjan