If my scribblings are correct, that bias works out to be something like 5.66A for poor folks like me who are stuck thinking in RMS terms. The amp would then deliver maximum power (a bit less than 170W [that's RMS, not peak]) at about 5.25 ohms; current limiting sets in at impedances below that, voltage is the limitation above.
Grey
Grey
Every high end manufacturer hears this question, but those who try it find that the product falls into a never-never land. High end folks won't touch it because they assume that too many corners were cut to hit a given price point--and they don't really need such a thing, anyway. Low & mid-fi buyers will generally go for a "name they've heard of" like Yamaha, NAD, et. al. As a result, the poor thing sits on the shelf for a few years gathering dust, then is quietly discontinued.
You could try rolling your own based on the projects and/or published schematics. That way you could mix and match, ending up with an X front end and Aleph amp, or visa versa.
Grey
You could try rolling your own based on the projects and/or published schematics. That way you could mix and match, ending up with an X front end and Aleph amp, or visa versa.
Grey
I guess i was just more interested in how it would look, not really
thinking if it was a viable product for Pass Labs. When you think
about it, an integrated really isn't in their demographic. If you can
afford Pass Labs quality, you're going to go all out with separates.
Half of the fun of Pass Labs products is seeing what a new piece
is going to look like. ...seems like we'll be waiting for a while now,
since the X and XA line are chugging right along.
thinking if it was a viable product for Pass Labs. When you think
about it, an integrated really isn't in their demographic. If you can
afford Pass Labs quality, you're going to go all out with separates.
Half of the fun of Pass Labs products is seeing what a new piece
is going to look like. ...seems like we'll be waiting for a while now,
since the X and XA line are chugging right along.
i agree with GRollins.
where i work, we see many integrates. we have had great products by musical fidelity (tri-vista and normal series), and new classe. they are awesome, but they end up collecting dust
we end up selling many rotels and denons. the integrated customer is really a more mid-fi customer.
i think our company total sold 2 of the musical fidelity tri-vista integrated. it was magical, 350wpc, two-chassis. it sounded amazing. BUT, in that price range, you can get separates, and respect.
where i work, we see many integrates. we have had great products by musical fidelity (tri-vista and normal series), and new classe. they are awesome, but they end up collecting dust
we end up selling many rotels and denons. the integrated customer is really a more mid-fi customer.
i think our company total sold 2 of the musical fidelity tri-vista integrated. it was magical, 350wpc, two-chassis. it sounded amazing. BUT, in that price range, you can get separates, and respect.
As to how things look, I admit to being of the old school--show me big hunks of metal (like my Thresholds or the current Pass stuff). I do think it odd, however, that so many pieces are being made which are 19" wide and multiples of 1.75" high...but have no screw slots for rack mounting. So is it rack, or not? The poor little pieces of equipment have an identity crisis.
I'm one of those weird people who actually rack mounts things. Otherwise, I'd be overwhelmed by the hardware involved in a quad-amped system--six out of the eight channels of amplification are monoblocks. Note that I've filled my rack and things are still sprawled on the floor, but it helps.
The one exception I make to the industrial hunk-o-metal cosmetic preference is the McIntosh black glass approach. Beautiful.
Grey
I'm one of those weird people who actually rack mounts things. Otherwise, I'd be overwhelmed by the hardware involved in a quad-amped system--six out of the eight channels of amplification are monoblocks. Note that I've filled my rack and things are still sprawled on the floor, but it helps.
The one exception I make to the industrial hunk-o-metal cosmetic preference is the McIntosh black glass approach. Beautiful.
Grey
Ain't got no digital camera. I'll probably buy one as soon as I use up the film I have on hand for my "real" camera.
Current roster:
Aleph-X monoblocks for ribbon tweeters (6 dB/oct HP @ 5kHz)
---
Aleph 2 monoblocks for midranges (5 kHz & 250Hz, but this varies depending on my mood)
or
my 130W tube monoblocks (SERIOUS spaghetti farm--I tend to fiddle)(the best sounding amp I have in my possession, but twitchy to live with)
---
Aleph 2 monoblocks for woofer panels (250Hz and 50Hz)
or
Threshold S-500 (I've got two of these)
or
Hafler Pro 500 (only one of these--supposed to live in my bass rig)
---
Threshold S-500 for subwoofers (below 50Hz)
or
Hafler Pro 500
In other words, it's amp-o-rama around here. Note that the above list doesn't include a couple of other things here and there (including a Mini-A built on a board that some guy named MikeW sent me...ahem [thanks--it would have taken me another decade to run up a board for that, but now I don't have to]).
Grey
Current roster:
Aleph-X monoblocks for ribbon tweeters (6 dB/oct HP @ 5kHz)
---
Aleph 2 monoblocks for midranges (5 kHz & 250Hz, but this varies depending on my mood)
or
my 130W tube monoblocks (SERIOUS spaghetti farm--I tend to fiddle)(the best sounding amp I have in my possession, but twitchy to live with)
---
Aleph 2 monoblocks for woofer panels (250Hz and 50Hz)
or
Threshold S-500 (I've got two of these)
or
Hafler Pro 500 (only one of these--supposed to live in my bass rig)
---
Threshold S-500 for subwoofers (below 50Hz)
or
Hafler Pro 500
In other words, it's amp-o-rama around here. Note that the above list doesn't include a couple of other things here and there (including a Mini-A built on a board that some guy named MikeW sent me...ahem [thanks--it would have taken me another decade to run up a board for that, but now I don't have to]).
Grey
We are using fewer outputs these days, and it gets us a
little more detail on the top. The XA200 still uses 48, but
the XA160 has 32, and the XA100 has 20. You can figure
that smaller products yet will have some proportionality
along these lines, which corresponds to whatever we find
as the "sweet spot"
little more detail on the top. The XA200 still uses 48, but
the XA160 has 32, and the XA100 has 20. You can figure
that smaller products yet will have some proportionality
along these lines, which corresponds to whatever we find
as the "sweet spot"
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.