UCD180 Vs Others

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#4
I don't know if AKSA and UCD180 are quite comparable concepts. AKSA is a solid state Class AB amp (correct me if I'm wrong)whereas UCD180 is a PWM Class-D amp. However, sonically I believe a well-built UCD180 amp may outperform an AKSA.
I am also planning to build an UCD amp but it's hard to tell which
concept is really better. We need more reviewers.

Michael
 
#5
mlihl said:
I don't know if AKSA and UCD180 are quite comparable concepts. AKSA is a solid state Class AB amp (correct me if I'm wrong)whereas UCD180 is a PWM Class-D amp. However, sonically I believe a well-built UCD180 amp may outperform an AKSA.

Michael
Click to expand...


It would also be interesting to hear people's reactions to these different technologies in the various bands of a triamped system. I suspect, for no good reason whatsoever, that preferences might go class-D for bass & mids up to 2.5 kHz, and class-AB or class-A for the highs. This is completely speculative, of course.


Francois.
 
#6
DSP_Geek said:



It would also be interesting to hear people's reactions to these different technologies in the various bands of a triamped system. I suspect, for no good reason whatsoever, that preferences might go class-D for bass & mids up to 2.5 kHz, and class-AB or class-A for the highs. This is completely speculative, of course.


Francois.
Click to expand...


Hi Francois,

Class D (UcD) performs extremely well for the high frequencies as well, clearly better than my Accuphase that should be straight to well over a few hundred kHz. With the UcD things are just clearer, not in the sense of more high, but in the sense that the music sounds purer, less things added, less curtain in between the musicians and you. This less curtain effect is stronger than most people expect, at least I was very surprised to hear my far more expense Accuphase being blown away by the UcD.

I`m actually now using the the UcD180 for tweeter and midwoofers (1 for tweeter and 1 for midwoofer and active crossover, actually DSP) and a Tripath based Marantz for the woofers (will be replaced by UcD400 or 700). Works very well, I just finished this setup and first listening tests are very impressive. Very good imaging, you don`t hear or locate the speakers, just music.

Best regards

Gertjan
 
#7
ghemink said:



Hi Francois,

Class D (UcD) performs extremely well for the high frequencies as well, [....] at least I was very surprised to hear my far more expense Accuphase being blown away by the UcD.

I`m actually now using the the UcD180 for tweeter and midwoofers (1 for tweeter and 1 for midwoofer and active crossover, actually DSP) and a Tripath based Marantz for the woofers (will be replaced by UcD400 or 700). Works very well, I just finished this setup and first listening tests are very impressive. Very good imaging, you don`t hear or locate the speakers, just music.

Best regards

Gertjan
Click to expand...

Thanks a bunch - I already decided on a pair of UcD180s for each woofer (twin 4 ohm voice coils), but it's nice to know I can also use them for mids & higher. The current limit won't be a problem even with 50 volt supplies since box tuning will be set to 22 Hz, putting the higher impedance peak right in the middle of the woofer passband.

Mids will be another issue. Fortunately I found a Peavey CS-800 chassis missing only the power amps, so that's a possible home for some UcD400 modules. Have to do something about the fan and the gaudy faceplate, though....


Francois.
 
#9
Thanks for the replies - I'm interested in the UCD modules absolute sonic ranking not necessarly among Class D amps only.

I contend that a new technology in audio should push the sonic envelope (so to speak) and should not be compared soley based on what technology class it falls into.

John
 
#15
The tread from the Swedish DIYforum is about a blast among ClassD amps.
The blast is to be during november and will probably sort out a "winner".

I have listened to a friends UcD180 and compared it with some other amps.

It sent a Bob Carver Sunfire stereo amplifier to be ashamed in the corner. The UcD had so much more 3D and no distortion.

It formly crushed a Vincent sp331 amplifier. The Vincent was found having exagerated bass and treble and the bass produced was cloggy and indistinct. The vincent belonging to the same guy that owns UcD sold the vincent the day after the listening session.

Compaded to my own Musical Fidelity X-A1 the UcD was superior in every aspect, but the X-A1 did a far better job than the Vincent.

Another friend has evaluated the UcD against Sentec PA9 mono amps, and his conclusion was that the UcD did everyting the PA9 does with magic even better.

I´m ordering my pair of UcD400´s tomorrow and I´m aiming at having the amp completed before x-mas. 😀
The UcD is one of the best amplifiers i have ever heard. It works extremely well with Carlsson speakers.

opps.. long post for beeing the first... :xeye:

Best Regards,
Pontus
 
#18
Be aware!

I have heard & tested several pwm/"digital" amps, and have found one thing common: in a short listening-session/blind-test, they all "bloom", but I have not been able to live with any of them for more than a week...
My N-channel always finds it's way back...

Arne K
 
#20
Hello,
I'm a newbie and have been following this thread with much interest.
I have some questions for the experts.
Is there something to be gained sonically using two transformers instead of one?
About caps ichoice: PS: Black Gates are very expensive, Cerafines are hard to find, what about Jensens 4-pole?
How better AD8620 really is instead of the standard OPamp?
And last: this is going to be my first DIY project, how difficult is it really?
Thank you very much
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom