ewildgoose,
You sure? I thought we were 220-230 these days? however i didnt measure it !
I was trying to go about as high as I can without compromising safety with the UCD400's which was how I got to 42-0-42.
Thanks to you and Ouroboros for the Farnell lead.
You sure? I thought we were 220-230 these days? however i didnt measure it !
I was trying to go about as high as I can without compromising safety with the UCD400's which was how I got to 42-0-42.
Thanks to you and Ouroboros for the Farnell lead.
I think the standards changed to mandate that everyone in the EU would use 230V. However, to avoid anyone having to do anything they also changed the "tolerances" for the supply to be quite wide.
The practical upshot is that 240-250V in the UK is now meeting EU 230V standards... Aren't standards wonderful things...
The practical upshot is that 240-250V in the UK is now meeting EU 230V standards... Aren't standards wonderful things...
ewildgoose, oh I see the old hide it in the tolerances trick !
Looks as thogh I missed the Farnell trafos they are showing as none available now. Back to square one!
I should have bought from Hypex when i bought the modules.
Looks as thogh I missed the Farnell trafos they are showing as none available now. Back to square one!
I should have bought from Hypex when i bought the modules.
OK, try RS part number 223-8297. 2 x 40V 500VA. At £29.90 each for one-off.
RS accept private orders on the website, but you do have to register with them.
RS accept private orders on the website, but you do have to register with them.
Ouroboros, thanks for that one, it does not seem to exist on their site but I have found a couple that will do, 223-8926 or 223-8285.
223-8926 is encapsulated, I have not used one of them before are they worth the extra? whats the advantages of them?
223-8926 is encapsulated, I have not used one of them before are they worth the extra? whats the advantages of them?
Hi Thierry,
I wouldn't entertain the thought of using that particular regulator with a class D power amp.
Just think of the losses in the pass transistors... so much for efficiency.
UCD does have a respectable amount of PSRR so you're going to alot of effort and expense to improve on it.
An alternative is a SMPS, fairly complex, could cause interferance with the UCD.. need a smart design.
Capacitance multiplier is a third option, or perhaps a combination of the above, like a multiplier piggy backed off a SMPS.
The multiplier itself performs no regulation just smooths ripple further.
You should find these two threads rather interesting and I think will lead you in the right direction if that's what you want to do.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=55338
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/foru...r=&sortfield=lastpost&perpage=25&pagenumber=2
Nice huh?
Regards,
Chris
I wouldn't entertain the thought of using that particular regulator with a class D power amp.
Just think of the losses in the pass transistors... so much for efficiency.
UCD does have a respectable amount of PSRR so you're going to alot of effort and expense to improve on it.
An alternative is a SMPS, fairly complex, could cause interferance with the UCD.. need a smart design.
Capacitance multiplier is a third option, or perhaps a combination of the above, like a multiplier piggy backed off a SMPS.
The multiplier itself performs no regulation just smooths ripple further.
You should find these two threads rather interesting and I think will lead you in the right direction if that's what you want to do.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=55338
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/foru...r=&sortfield=lastpost&perpage=25&pagenumber=2
Nice huh?
Regards,
Chris
I'm just modifying my amps to add a DC fuse between the powersupply output and the UCD module (which I think is the correct place for safety?)
I was quite excited when I spotted these things in Farnell:
http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/endecaSearch/partDetail.jsp?SKU=3882792&N=401
However, they haven't got any of the wretched things until September....
Has anyone else got any suggestions (for UK delivery) for a nice, easy to retrofit, fuse. I really need something that I can stick inline in the existing power-wires rather than a PCB mounted thing.
Thanks
P.S. Is 6amp fast blow about the correct rating? ie same power rating as the amp max?
I was quite excited when I spotted these things in Farnell:
http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/endecaSearch/partDetail.jsp?SKU=3882792&N=401
However, they haven't got any of the wretched things until September....
Has anyone else got any suggestions (for UK delivery) for a nice, easy to retrofit, fuse. I really need something that I can stick inline in the existing power-wires rather than a PCB mounted thing.
Thanks
P.S. Is 6amp fast blow about the correct rating? ie same power rating as the amp max?
I haven't looked to see if they do fast blow versions of those blade fuses that's all...
I have seen some of the blade holders also come with the wires ready attached (convenient), but it's hard to tell whether the wire is a decent guage from the specs online...
Thanks
I have seen some of the blade holders also come with the wires ready attached (convenient), but it's hard to tell whether the wire is a decent guage from the specs online...
Thanks
classd4sure said:
Thanks for reply Chris,
I'm not electronician and have not the capabilities to design something myself
. And sorry, I difficultly understand PSRR... againI was just thinking that this regulated PSU could be great because of:
- better output voltage stability
- Stability independant of main voltage
- Good adjustement between + an - rail voltage.
- low cost
Sure, there's approximatively 10% of voltage lost with the transistor. But for benefits, the author says that the first big capacitors do the 'bad work' (smoothing the voltage), and the 'sound' come from the output capacitors (which can have long life time, in addition). The amplifier seem to see a low impedance PSU, that's all.
So, I don't really understand why this PSU couldn't be OK for UCD.
Could you explain me? (and please, simply, please
)
RickOray said:
Thanks for reply Chris,
I'm not electronician and have not the capabilities to design something myself
I was just thinking that this regulated PSU could be great because of:
- better output voltage stability
- Stability independant of main voltage
- Good adjustement between + an - rail voltage.
- low cost
Sure, there's approximatively 10% of voltage lost with the transistor. But for benefits, the author says that the first big capacitors do the 'bad work' (smoothing the voltage), and the 'sound' come from the output capacitors (which can have long life time, in addition). The amplifier seem to see a low impedance PSU, that's all.
So, I don't really understand why this PSU couldn't be OK for UCD.
Could you explain me? (and please, simply, please
The problem with such a regulated PSU is the power loss, if you don't care about that, then it is OK to use. With those big caps at the output, power supply pumping should be no issue. Power loss would also depend on mains voltage variation so in case mains voltage is say 10% higher than nominal, power dissipation would be higher. Sufficient heatsinking is needed.
As suggested by Chris, using a capacitance multiplier like the active PSU from http://www.wnaudio.com/ will do the same thing but without the power loss (or only a fraction of the power loss). You would have to add big caps after the capacitance multiplier to avoid power supply pumping.
Safest is to go for a ready to go power supply from hypex as that had everything you need, anti-pop startup and shutdown and DC protection. Really the best way if you don't want to risk anything and be sure that things work as they should.
Best regards
Gertjan
Thoughts on Ucd advantages
I have read a number of times that the great sonic advantage of the Ucd amps is that THD+N is practically independent of frequency. This could be a theoreticlly correct assumption as all frequencies in the music are treated in the same manner but ...
THD+N is not independent of power.
According to my measurements THD+N from for example Ucd 180 is extremely low at low powers (0,001%) but approaches 0,05% at higher powers. This means that if there are hard drum beats present in the music signal at the same time as vocals the drum beats will seriously affect the linearity of the vocals. According to me lowering this effect should be even more important than having constant THD+N vs frequency as it affects the dynamic behaviour of the amplifier.
I have read a number of times that the great sonic advantage of the Ucd amps is that THD+N is practically independent of frequency. This could be a theoreticlly correct assumption as all frequencies in the music are treated in the same manner but ...
THD+N is not independent of power.
According to my measurements THD+N from for example Ucd 180 is extremely low at low powers (0,001%) but approaches 0,05% at higher powers. This means that if there are hard drum beats present in the music signal at the same time as vocals the drum beats will seriously affect the linearity of the vocals. According to me lowering this effect should be even more important than having constant THD+N vs frequency as it affects the dynamic behaviour of the amplifier.
Re: Thoughts on Ucd advantages
Still these amps keep sounding clean, even at high levels. However, I'm smugling a bit, I'm using them in an active system where each amp has to cover only a limited frequency band. This should limit intermodulation distortion.
Don't forget that speakers at higher levels produce more distortion as well. Probably in most cases, the speakers are the distortion limiting factor, not the amps?
Best regards
Gertjan
Pabo said:
Still these amps keep sounding clean, even at high levels. However, I'm smugling a bit, I'm using them in an active system where each amp has to cover only a limited frequency band. This should limit intermodulation distortion.
Don't forget that speakers at higher levels produce more distortion as well. Probably in most cases, the speakers are the distortion limiting factor, not the amps?
Best regards
Gertjan
Re: Re: Thoughts on Ucd advantages
Using the fact that speakers are the distortion limiting factor could be used for defending any amplifier. When generating high sound pressures with a speaker the distortion easily approaches a couple of percent. In that case the constant THD+N vs frequency could not give better sound either as the speaker has soo much distortion and a distortion which is not constant versus frequency.
ghemink said:
Using the fact that speakers are the distortion limiting factor could be used for defending any amplifier. When generating high sound pressures with a speaker the distortion easily approaches a couple of percent. In that case the constant THD+N vs frequency could not give better sound either as the speaker has soo much distortion and a distortion which is not constant versus frequency.
Off topic
This does raise some interesting points. There is no doubt that the speakers themselves are the limiting factor. The new UcD amps are showing that clearly. Hopefully this will inspire new speaker designs that are capable of demonstrating just how good they really are. Problems, like bad crossovers, that were masked now are apparent. I have listened to several speakers with my UcD 400 based amp and am surprised at how apparent the problems are. As others have found, UcD amps also will highlight cable and power cord deficiencies. No news to me is how they are able to let you hear how bad most recordings really are. Bottom line is we now are retrieving a lot more information and will have to adjust to that fact!
Roger
This does raise some interesting points. There is no doubt that the speakers themselves are the limiting factor. The new UcD amps are showing that clearly. Hopefully this will inspire new speaker designs that are capable of demonstrating just how good they really are. Problems, like bad crossovers, that were masked now are apparent. I have listened to several speakers with my UcD 400 based amp and am surprised at how apparent the problems are. As others have found, UcD amps also will highlight cable and power cord deficiencies. No news to me is how they are able to let you hear how bad most recordings really are. Bottom line is we now are retrieving a lot more information and will have to adjust to that fact!
Roger
@sx881663
Absolutely true. I've tested UcD400 up to the B&W Nautilus 804 and its sounding magnificent.
When I finish my UcD400 amps (Hypex HQ and a big toroid) I'm going to take it to the local high-end shop - Let's see if I can impress these guys. I won't tell that it's a Class D until they ask WTF is that! 😀
That'll be fun. See if it holds a candle to the shopkeeper's pet amps, the McIntosh's. H*ll, maybe it'll better it 😀
Absolutely true. I've tested UcD400 up to the B&W Nautilus 804 and its sounding magnificent.
When I finish my UcD400 amps (Hypex HQ and a big toroid) I'm going to take it to the local high-end shop - Let's see if I can impress these guys. I won't tell that it's a Class D until they ask WTF is that! 😀
That'll be fun. See if it holds a candle to the shopkeeper's pet amps, the McIntosh's. H*ll, maybe it'll better it 😀
Sorry if this has been asked a lot of times, but is there any information on the idle current (not in standby, but with the module ON), in each rail vs. supply voltage, or at least the max. current at the maximum voltage, +/-63V?
Alternatively, what is the idle (ON) power dissipation of the whole module?
Thanks!
Alternatively, what is the idle (ON) power dissipation of the whole module?
Thanks!