Basically what they did was they connected two 50V caps in series for each rail to yield an equivalent working voltage of 100V. The downside of that is the total capacitance is now half that of just the single cap value since capacitors in series sum as follows: 1/Ceq = (1/C1 + 1/C2) much like how resistors in parallel add. The other downside is the Effective Series Resistance (ESR) also doubles when caps are placed in series.
Ok, now I get their reasoning.gene said:
For $1200, you'll be able to get the 125 X 6 amp and what looks to be a pretty well-equipt preamp/processor. You gotta wonder how they're making any money on it; either that or you wonder how much profit the average vendor is making... Even by direct sales standards, that's a bargain, assuming it performs.
I think Gene was making two separate points, series two physically shorter 50V capacitors instead of one taller 80V capacitor, otherwise the enclosure may have to be taller. The use of 105 deg C rated components was a separate point he made, probably not related to the use of capacitors in series. Although one can argue that the use of taller capacitors would have resulted in a larger enclosure, therefore naturally better ventilated.surveyor said:
Clint is heading up the review of the DMC-1 which should be out in the next couple of weeks or so.
Yes I was merely pointing out that they used higher rated and incidentally costlier parts than what we typically see in consumer audio.
Will the review of the pre-processor include pairing it with the Emotiva MPS-1 and other amps?gene said:
Clint,Clint DeBoer said:
We simply were not able to have the same person review both units due to scheduling, so Gene and I split it up.blue said:
That is nice marketing, but you have to understand that if a pre-pro or amp were ever "voiced" that would imply the manufacturer is messing with the frequency response, turning your amp or pre-pro into an expensive, forced, EQ. I personally would stay far away from anything that actually claimed that. Now it's possible they just meant they made sure the amps could drive their speakers, but a good amp should be able to drive any speakers, including those that are more inefficient than Paradigms. Again, thank their marketing department for wonderfully flowery language.
Where do I score a copy?
As I stated in the review, due to the amp topology and out of band switching noise, it likely polluted my measurement slightly, as did their inclusion of the limiting circuit (which I feel is a good trade off). In reality, if you couple this amp with a very clean pre/pro such as a Yamaha RXV-2500 it shouldn't present any real world problems. Granted, I was using 90dB efficient speakers in my tests. Users of ultra high sensitive 98dB+ speakers such as klipsh may have different results, but they likely wouldn't require such a powerful amp anyways
As a point of reference, can you tell us what the SNR at 1W was for the 2500 (i.e., using the amps rather than just the preamp stage)? I saw reference to the concept in your review of the 2500, but couldn't find the actual number in the review or bench test. Also, in your listening tests, did you have much opportunity to listen at relatively modest volumes? I assume that is when it would show up most, if it was to show up at all. If it was to become an issue at modest volume, how would it manifest itself? Hiss? Flat sound?gene said:
