|
Post by copperpipe on Sept 26, 2014 11:08:28 GMT -5
Well well,.... I would love an Emotiva branded hypex ncore amps!! It can be done... NAD has released their M22 amp based on the NC400, so it definitely can happen. And for the XPR crowd, they could do amps based on the NC1200, which are for OEM only. Where would Emotiva's value come in with this? It's not going to happen. Emotiva builds a great amp, they're not going to source the electronics from elsewhere otherwise there is not much left to an Emotiva amp other than a bullet proof case and some blue lights
|
|
|
Post by paintedklown on Sept 26, 2014 12:43:47 GMT -5
Well well,.... I would love an Emotiva branded hypex ncore amps!! It can be done... NAD has released their M22 amp based on the NC400, so it definitely can happen. And for the XPR crowd, they could do amps based on the NC1200, which are for OEM only. Where would Emotiva's value come in with this? It's not going to happen. Emotiva builds a great amp, they're not going to source the electronics from elsewhere otherwise there is not much left to an Emotiva amp other than a bullet proof case and some blue lights Source the components in bulk for a lower cost, Emo branding and style, Emo 5 year warranty (that includes Emo's fantastic customer service), and make a mono block only version for a low cost assembly line and easy production. That way each person can buy what channels they need, without having to worry about not having enough, or buying extra channels of power they don't need (buying a 5 ch amp for 4 speakers, etc). I'd be all in for that.
|
|
|
Post by GreenKiwi on Sept 29, 2014 0:24:49 GMT -5
I think that there are two factors
1. My guess is that Hypex doesn't want someone coming in and undercutting the price of their units... I'm sure that was part of why they only let people build/sell units with the nc1200s for a long time. These sold for $5-7k each, for monoblocks
2. There really isn't much else for Emotiva to actually do, in terms of adding value. Most of the cost would be the amp and power supply, and those are manufactured by hypex.
|
|
emovac
Emo VIPs
Saeed al-Sahhaf
Posts: 2,456
|
Post by emovac on Sept 29, 2014 0:46:15 GMT -5
I have Wyred4Sound Class D integrated STI500, and a W4S MC7x250 7 channel Class D amp. Sounds awesome. Low energy use, minimal heat production. Emotiva would benefit from have class D as an option in their product catalog
|
|
|
Post by GTPlus on Sept 30, 2014 8:18:20 GMT -5
I would love to see a multi-channel class D from Emotiva. Not too concerned with weight, but shelf space is a premium for me. So size matters. Also still interested in an Emotiva sub amp as well.
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on Sept 30, 2014 9:37:12 GMT -5
Class D is an unnatural form of power. Pulse width modulated waveforms at the power level spue out a tremendous amount and frequency range of electromagnetic interference. Power level handling filters must brute force it into an analog waveform compatible with speakers and human hearing. It is like an inherently unstable airplane that must be actively controlled by a computer 100% of the time to keep it in the air. I'll stick with conventional amplifiers, thank you.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,924
|
Post by KeithL on Sept 30, 2014 11:43:45 GMT -5
You are 100% correct - and I like your analogy to an airplane.... However, and keeping that analogy in mind, you also have to put the whole thing in the context of modern design and manufacture. In the early days of Class D amplifiers, there were lots of issues with noise emissions, and with problems caused by imperfectly implemented reconstruction filters (the filter that "turns" the digital waveform or pulse train into an analog waveform), and some modern designs still have those problems. However, the better designs seem to have overcome most of these issues (just like many quite successful modern high-performance fighter planes are "inherently unstable and require a computer to fly them"). In airplanes, that inherent instability often delivers better maneuverability that in those whose maneuverability is limited by their stability. (And, unlike an airplane, you're never going to have to try and perform a successful "dead stick landing" on your stereo system.) Class A/B linear amplifiers are a lot easier to design, and have far fewer complications in design and manufacture (not so many situations where a millimeter here or there will result in their not working right), which are certainly significant advantages. However, if you ever hope to see a 200 wpc amplifier that sounds good, and fits in your pocket, or even your lunchbox, then it's probably going to have to be digital - and, if it's well designed and manufactured, the digital amp will do the job pretty well. Here at Emotiva, we're more focused on end results than on philosophy (sometimes philosophy guides you to the best way to get the results you want - but not always). We constantly evaluate the current level of Class D amplifier technology to determine whether it fits into our product plans. When we find ourselves able to source a digital amplifier that meets our requirements in terms of sound quality, and the value we can provide to our customers, we will probably do so. Class D is an unnatural form of power. Pulse width modulated waveforms at the power level spue out a tremendous amount and frequency range of electromagnetic interference. Power level handling filters must brute force it into an analog waveform compatible with speakers and human hearing. It is like an inherently unstable airplane that must be actively controlled by a computer 100% of the time to keep it in the air. I'll stick with conventional amplifiers, thank you.
|
|
|
Post by Cogito on Sept 30, 2014 12:57:47 GMT -5
You are 100% correct - and I like your analogy to an airplane.... However, and keeping that analogy in mind, you also have to put the whole thing in the context of modern design and manufacture. In the early days of Class D amplifiers, there were lots of issues with noise emissions, and with problems caused by imperfectly implemented reconstruction filters (the filter that "turns" the digital waveform or pulse train into an analog waveform), and some modern designs still have those problems. However, the better designs seem to have overcome most of these issues (just like many quite successful modern high-performance fighter planes are "inherently unstable and require a computer to fly them"). In airplanes, that inherent instability often delivers better maneuverability that in those whose maneuverability is limited by their stability. (And, unlike an airplane, you're never going to have to try and perform a successful "dead stick landing" on your stereo system.) Class A/B linear amplifiers are a lot easier to design, and have far fewer complications in design and manufacture (not so many situations where a millimeter here or there will result in their not working right), which are certainly significant advantages. However, if you ever hope to see a 200 wpc amplifier that sounds good, and fits in your pocket, or even your lunchbox, then it's probably going to have to be digital - and, if it's well designed and manufactured, the digital amp will do the job pretty well. Here at Emotiva, we're more focused on end results than on philosophy (sometimes philosophy guides you to the best way to get the results you want - but not always). We constantly evaluate the current level of Class D amplifier technology to determine whether it fits into our product plans. When we find ourselves able to source a digital amplifier that meets our requirements in terms of sound quality, and the value we can provide to our customers, we will probably do so. Class D is an unnatural form of power. Pulse width modulated waveforms at the power level spue out a tremendous amount and frequency range of electromagnetic interference. Power level handling filters must brute force it into an analog waveform compatible with speakers and human hearing. It is like an inherently unstable airplane that must be actively controlled by a computer 100% of the time to keep it in the air. I'll stick with conventional amplifiers, thank you. IMHO The technology has matured to the point that any glaring issues is once had, have been corrected with modern technologies and design. Even some of the biggest names in the business (Mark Levinson, Rotel, Anthem, etc.) have class D designs and I doubt if they were of substandard sound quality, they would have never made it to market. As with ANY current technology, they all have their pros and cons. The question to ask yourself, do the pros makes the cons insignificant? When it comes to Class D designs, the answer is a resounding "Yes".
|
|
|
Post by drtrey3 on Sept 30, 2014 13:02:02 GMT -5
Eh, some people value energy savings and green tech more than sound. More power to them (heh heh) but I value the sound most.
Trey
|
|
|
Post by rogersch on Sept 30, 2014 13:39:47 GMT -5
However, if you ever hope to see a 200 wpc amplifier that sounds good, and fits in your pocket, or even your lunchbox, then it's probably going to have to be digital - and, if it's well designed and manufactured, the digital amp will do the job pretty well. Here at Emotiva, we're more focused on end results than on philosophy (sometimes philosophy guides you to the best way to get the results you want - but not always). We constantly evaluate the current level of Class D amplifier technology to determine whether it fits into our product plans. When we find ourselves able to source a digital amplifier that meets our requirements in terms of sound quality, and the value we can provide to our customers, we will probably do so. Keith, sorry to correct you but a Class D amplifier is not equal to a digital amplifier..... From Wikipedia" TerminologyThe term "class D" is sometimes misunderstood as meaning a "digital" amplifier. While some class D amps may indeed be controlled by digital circuits or include digital signal processing devices, the power stage deals with voltage and current as a function of non-quantized time."
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Sept 30, 2014 13:47:44 GMT -5
Yes, they are "switching" amplifiers...but they can be analog or digital.
The Great and Powerful Oz knows that, I'm sure...so hold back on the flying monkeys.
|
|
|
Post by ansat on Sept 30, 2014 14:01:49 GMT -5
However, if you ever hope to see a 200 wpc amplifier that sounds good, and fits in your pocket, or even your lunchbox, then it's probably going to have to be digital - and, if it's well designed and manufactured, the digital amp will do the job pretty well. Here at Emotiva, we're more focused on end results than on philosophy (sometimes philosophy guides you to the best way to get the results you want - but not always). We constantly evaluate the current level of Class D amplifier technology to determine whether it fits into our product plans. When we find ourselves able to source a digital amplifier that meets our requirements in terms of sound quality, and the value we can provide to our customers, we will probably do so. Keith, sorry to correct you but a Class D amplifier is not equal to a digital amplifier..... From Wikipedia" TerminologyThe term "class D" is sometimes misunderstood as meaning a "digital" amplifier. While some class D amps may indeed be controlled by digital circuits or include digital signal processing devices, the power stage deals with voltage and current as a function of non-quantized time." Them's fighting words.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,924
|
Post by KeithL on Sept 30, 2014 15:14:01 GMT -5
Wikipedia is often a pretty good source of information, but one must always remember that it is "crowd sourced" - which means that it contains "what a lot of people said and more or less agreed upon". This is not always the same as being factually accurate and/or complete. Since, in the case of "Class D", there is no "official" or "legal" definition for the term anyway, you are free to use their definition - if you can entirely figure it out. (I'm sorry, but parts of their description just don't work for me.... and there are some outright contradictions in it.) They start the description by saying "A class-D amplifier or switching amplifier is an electronic amplifier in which the amplifying devices (transistors, usually MOSFETs) operate as electronic switches, instead of as linear gain devices as in other amplifiers" (which is pretty much the industry-standard description). Then, later, they contradict (or complicate) that by the quote you snipped. In general, they jump back and forth between several different "definitions" and various descriptions of some specific ways in which a "digital amplifier" can be made. In reality, there are quite a few rather different Class D designs. However, they all share the basic characteristic of having an output stage that operates as a switch (or switches).. The normal industry standard interpretation of the term "Class D" is that "Class D" amplifiers are "switching amplifiers" (and since a switch is a digital device, this also qualifies them to be termed "digital amplifiers"). Regardless of whether you prefer to call them "Class D amplifiers" or "digital switching amplifiers", I think you will agree that this sort of amplifier operation is the antithesis of Class A, Class B, Class G, and Class H - all of which operate the output stage in a linear mode of operation. Any output stage that operates in a linear mode spends a significant portion of its time in a state where it is both dropping voltage and passing current; and, during that time, it must dissipate power. This is why Class A/B output stages are, at best, about 70% efficient. The excellent efficiency of Class D amplifiers is a direct result of their "digital switching" behavior. A switch is either off (in which case it has the full supply voltage across it, but is passing no current), or on (in which case it is passing current but there is no voltage across it); since the switch dissipates zero power in either of those states, a perfect switch would be 100.0% efficient. Of course, real world switching amplifiers fall somewhat short of this ideal... but they are still usually far more efficient than the other (linear) types of amplifier. Keith, sorry to correct you but a Class D amplifier is not equal to a digital amplifier..... From Wikipedia" TerminologyThe term "class D" is sometimes misunderstood as meaning a "digital" amplifier. While some class D amps may indeed be controlled by digital circuits or include digital signal processing devices, the power stage deals with voltage and current as a function of non-quantized time." Them's fighting words.
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Sept 30, 2014 15:36:32 GMT -5
Class D is an unnatural form of power. Pulse width modulated waveforms at the power level spue out a tremendous amount and frequency range of electromagnetic interference. Power level handling filters must brute force it into an analog waveform compatible with speakers and human hearing. It is like an inherently unstable airplane that must be actively controlled by a computer 100% of the time to keep it in the air. I'll stick with conventional amplifiers, thank you. You mean like the (now decommissioned) space shuttle?
|
|
|
Post by rogersch on Sept 30, 2014 15:45:06 GMT -5
Some interesting material to read about Class D amplifiers (just for reading fun not to further fuel the discussion ): Hypex: All Amplifiers Are Analogue, but Some Are More Analogue Than OthersAnd: Hypex: AES Class D master class.Extract from this document: Definition “Digital amplifier” is an oxymoron • Voltage, current and time are physical quantities (analogue). • Digital is strings of numbers. • Speakers don’t understand numbers. • Class D requires analogue design skills to make work. • DSP control may help solve or exacerbate analogue issues. And looking at the quality product Bruno Putzeys of Hypex has delivered with the NCore, I really believe he knows what he is talking about....
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on Oct 1, 2014 8:58:38 GMT -5
Bruno Putzey has indeed designed a great class D board in the nCore line. But so far notice that only mono block products have emerged. Is this because of the high level of radiated noise? If so designing a multi channel cl D amp, nCore or other, is very difficult and I think, with ordinary construction methods, uneconomical.
|
|
|
Post by rogersch on Oct 1, 2014 9:06:09 GMT -5
Bruno Putzey has indeed designed a great class D board in the nCore line. But for far notice that only mono block products have emerged. Is this because of the high level of radiated noise? If so designing a multi channel cl D amp, nCore or other, is very difficult and I think, with ordinary construction methods, uneconomical. That is not correct. I'm running 5 ncore amps without any cover. No issues regarding radiating noise. Also Hypex has developed a 7 channel amp for NAD.
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on Oct 1, 2014 9:44:58 GMT -5
There is no specification that I can find on EMI from Putzey or Nad or anyone else producing Cl D amps. Glad you are not having any interference issues. I'm not convinced that EMI problems aren't possible, indeed highly probable, under different mixes of location and nearby components. But I sincerely hope I am wrong and that no concern about EMI is necessary. So far, however, class D has caused many such problems. (No cover - really! Sounds dangerous!)
|
|
|
Post by GreenKiwi on Oct 1, 2014 23:10:19 GMT -5
Yeah, I wouldn't run my nCores regularly w/o a cover. Particularly the SMPS.
I think that the reason that most people build monoblocks is that the power supply lines up nicely with it and the difference in cost isn't that great.
|
|
|
Post by rogersch on Oct 2, 2014 1:41:41 GMT -5
Yeah, I wouldn't run my nCores regularly w/o a cover. Particularly the SMPS. I think that the reason that most people build monoblocks is that the power supply lines up nicely with it and the difference in cost isn't that great. All my audio and video equipment is stored in my TV cabinet which is closed at the front (open at the back for ventilation). As I've stored all my media files on a NAS and I use a Harmony remote with RF, this cabinet rarely needs to be opened. Even in case somebody opens the cabinet, in the unlikely event somebody want to use a round shiny disc in the Blu-Ray player, you can't touch the NCore and SMSPS by "accident". I removed the covers, which have no ventilation holes, of the enclosures in order to optimize the cooling the amps.
|
|