Curious - how do you know its a complete lie? Seeing as we're talking assumptions vs hypotheses, do you have any observations to share which bear on my political leanings?
D
Deleted member 148505
1. Abraxalito assumption/hypothesis: MA5332M is a repackaged IRS2092 (post #834).
2. Abraxalito changes subject that MA5332M and IRS2092 are based on the same IP (duh!) which was not the hypothesis. See 1. MA12070 is also based on the same IP as they're all from the same company. Disguises original subject with "If anyone left behind would be interested to falsify my hypothesis that the MA5332 and IRS2092 share the same IP as regards the modulator/comparator stage and supporting circuitry, I'm all ears."(Post #843)
3. Jlesterp: shows part datasheet of MA5332M where it only says that MA5332M has the same protection features as its predecessor IR43x2M.
4. Jlesterp concludes that MA5332M is a IRS2092 with integrated MOSFETs. Wrong assumption as IRS2092 is not mentioned. MA5332M datasheet only says IR43x2M to be a predecessor with the same protection features. Saying that MA5332M could be a repackaged IR43x2M contains more truth but is still on thin ice.
5. JlesterP shows part of datasheet of MA12070 being based on multilevel switching technology. True but has nothing to do with the subject. Both MA5332M, IR43x2M and IRS2092 are NOT based on multilevel switching technology as that is the novelty of MA12070.
Facts: MA5332M is a follow up on IR43x2M which is itself a follow up of IRS2092. So there is even a chip in-between. Even if they would be very alike they are still not the same as MA5332M has MOSFETs and may perform unlike the other chips. Besides that it has high output power. Testing the MA5332M will show what reality is. MA12070 seems to be the real novelty and unlike the other cousins in the line up as it has newer technology and very low noise.
For world peace we hand over the first prize to Abraxalito as his new hypothesis that the MA5332 and IRS2092 share the same IP with regards to the modulator/comparator stage and supporting circuitry likely is partly true. The chips are also the same color and made by the same manufacturer Infineon. True politics, perfect word play . Congratulations Abraxalito!
2. Abraxalito changes subject that MA5332M and IRS2092 are based on the same IP (duh!) which was not the hypothesis. See 1. MA12070 is also based on the same IP as they're all from the same company. Disguises original subject with "If anyone left behind would be interested to falsify my hypothesis that the MA5332 and IRS2092 share the same IP as regards the modulator/comparator stage and supporting circuitry, I'm all ears."(Post #843)
3. Jlesterp: shows part datasheet of MA5332M where it only says that MA5332M has the same protection features as its predecessor IR43x2M.
4. Jlesterp concludes that MA5332M is a IRS2092 with integrated MOSFETs. Wrong assumption as IRS2092 is not mentioned. MA5332M datasheet only says IR43x2M to be a predecessor with the same protection features. Saying that MA5332M could be a repackaged IR43x2M contains more truth but is still on thin ice.
5. JlesterP shows part of datasheet of MA12070 being based on multilevel switching technology. True but has nothing to do with the subject. Both MA5332M, IR43x2M and IRS2092 are NOT based on multilevel switching technology as that is the novelty of MA12070.
Facts: MA5332M is a follow up on IR43x2M which is itself a follow up of IRS2092. So there is even a chip in-between. Even if they would be very alike they are still not the same as MA5332M has MOSFETs and may perform unlike the other chips. Besides that it has high output power. Testing the MA5332M will show what reality is. MA12070 seems to be the real novelty and unlike the other cousins in the line up as it has newer technology and very low noise.
For world peace we hand over the first prize to Abraxalito as his new hypothesis that the MA5332 and IRS2092 share the same IP with regards to the modulator/comparator stage and supporting circuitry likely is partly true. The chips are also the same color and made by the same manufacturer Infineon. True politics, perfect word play . Congratulations Abraxalito!
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 148505
IRS2092 and MA5332 have similar control loop designs, the chip process might have improved but they still have the same topology.
Just highlighting this because others might assume that MA5332 is the higher version of MA12070, just because they have the same "Merus" branding.
IRS2092
MA5332
MA12070 has a proprietary control loop design. Which is why the design hasn't been shown in its datasheet
MA5332 definitely does not implement a multilevel topology
D
Deleted member 148505
Nah, MA5332 is really just a (to borrow the word from abraxalito) "repackaged" IRS2092 much like the Apple M2 chip is built on its predecessor, the M1. They have the same architecture.
They have the same THD, same noise, and same freq vs THD+N, power dissipation was improved due to integrated mosfets. You are arguing over a very thin line of MA5332 with built in mosfets, and IRS2092 without mosfets. That's all.
They have the same THD, same noise, and same freq vs THD+N, power dissipation was improved due to integrated mosfets. You are arguing over a very thin line of MA5332 with built in mosfets, and IRS2092 without mosfets. That's all.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 148505
Yes I get it, all things have nuances, actually even identical amplifier modules do behave slightly differently.
Regards,
Lester
Reassuring to see at least a nod towards acknowledging my own terminology. On refection I feel 'repackaged' probably did not carry the most appropriate meaning, I'll clarify by replacing it with 'repurposed'.
No changing the subject from my side, its all from the same cloth. There's no major redesign of the component parts of MA5332, its re-use and re-purposing of existing IP.
That looks to me like a total failure of reasoning. IR2092 was from IR which was later bought by Infineon. As reflected by the different prefixes. So did Infineon inherit the original design team of the IRS2092?
The opening 3 words entirely your own gloss.
Show reasoning why explicit mention of a prior generation would be needed? Looks an entirely reasonable conclusion to me and your 'wrong' is merely an assertion.
So you claim.
A first - a completely reasonable handful of sentences.
Yes but preaching to the choir.
As the manufacturer indeed does and shows results in their DS.
Lower noise certainly when compared to IRS2092 applications, 'very' is open to debate and likely hyperbole here.
Which parts of it are false?
Congratulations to @jean-paul for sophistry. Not world class sophistry but commendable nevertheless. Also a booby prize for returning to the fray after signalling leaving (post #842) without replying to the dangling question. Definitely worthy of a deflection award, perhaps bronze coloured.
They certainly will behave differently, without a doubt. Simply because you can directly connect an output inductor to the MA5332 with its internal MOSFETS. IRS2092 does not have them. Duh!
Here is one. It is not hard to see
Even the normal insulation washers don’t fit. These came from the main distribution channel of fake parts. Of course a picture of original ones was used.Glad I found a rail with LT1084CP but an original LT1083CP would be nice.
Attachments
Last edited:
I'm at the 50 hour mark with my unit and I am utterly satisfied. I encourage annybody who has a voltage differential out Dac to skip the whole analog stage on the dac side as well as on the amp side. Use 4 decent caps or better Transformers and you are set. The sonic result is startling. 26db gain is plenty for any but the most demanding speakers.
There is no lack in midrange clarity either, with this approach.
Enjoy the music!!!
Klaus
There is no lack in midrange clarity either, with this approach.
Enjoy the music!!!
Klaus
I have done direct coupling with AKM dacs since 2006. Quite frankly I never wanted to put a scope to the leads because I don't want to fix something technically that is sonically superior. Chasing harmonics and residue distortion is not my hobby. Sonic fidelity does not always correlate with technical perfectionism.