Buckeye Amps: Purifi Mono, 2ch, and 3ch Official Thread

[amper42]

1) Nothing special, just manufactured to specification
2) Absolutely, I touched on this in the NCx thread.

I can't find anything on Buckeye Power Use while idle for NCx500 on the Buckeye website. Can you please share the details for idle power use and after 10 minutes idle?
I'm also having trouble finding it under the NCx thread.

Also, is the Buckeye Purifi available with the OPA1656 op-amps? Bruno Putzeys is recommending OPA1656 op-amp as his favorite for Purifi builds. Thank you.

 

[Atmosphered]

I can't find anything on Buckeye Power Use while idle for NCx500 on the Buckeye website. Can you please share the details for idle power use and after 10 minutes idle?
I'm also having trouble finding it under the NCx thread.

Also, is the Buckeye Purifi available with the OPA1656 op-amps? Bruno Putzeys is recommending OPA1656 op-amp as his favorite for Purifi builds. Thank you.

The op-amps are the TI OPA1612 chips. You would have to talk with Buckeye to see if they have considered upgrading those chips to Bruno's recommended TI op-amps, at least on their Purifi amps. Of course, that would probably also mean upgrading the circuit boards being utilized in Dylan's builds. Whether or not that would make the price of the amps cost prohibitive for Buckeye's apparent market, I don't know. It would definitely require a redesign of some kind.

 

[Buckeye Amps]

I can't find anything on Buckeye Power Use while idle for NCx500 on the Buckeye website. Can you please share the details for idle power use and after 10 minutes idle?
I'm also having trouble finding it under the NCx thread.

Also, is the Buckeye Purifi available with the OPA1656 op-amps? Bruno Putzeys is recommending OPA1656 op-amp as his favorite for Purifi builds. Thank you.

The idle power needs to be updated/added to the site. In the NCx thread earlier today I mentioned we are working on incorporating an idle feature for the Micro Audio SMPS'

No plans to switch to the 1656 yet as it is not necessary (no audible advantage over the 1612)

 

[Atmosphered]

The idle power needs to be updated/added to the site. In the NCx thread earlier today I mentioned we are working on incorporating an idle feature for the Micro Audio SMPS'

No plans to switch to the 1656 yet as it is not necessary (no audible advantage over the 1612)

Has their been a stated specific reason as to why Bruno recommends the 1656 with his Purifi modules? A particular "house sound" characteristic or signature perhaps?

 

[Buckeye Amps]

Has their been a stated specific reason as to why Bruno recommends the 1656 with his Purifi modules? A particular "house sound" characteristic perhaps?

Absolutely no house sound involved in the equation, as the whole point of Bruno's (and Hypex as well) designs is neutral/uncolored sound. Which both the 1612 and 1656 abide by.

There is a slight measured difference between the two (and I mean slight), but audibly they are going to sound the same.

 

[Whoareyou]

The idle power needs to be updated/added to the site. In the NCx thread earlier today I mentioned we are working on incorporating an idle feature for the Micro Audio SMPS'

Any update on the idle feature? Thanks

 

[amper42]

Has their been a stated specific reason as to why Bruno recommends the 1656 with his Purifi modules? A particular "house sound" characteristic or signature perhaps?

Bruno Putzeys of Purifi indicates he prefers the TI OPA1656 even though on paper the OPA1612 looks better. His explanation is, "It's worth getting a hold of the OPA1656 as it’s input impedance is higher and much more linear than the OPA1612. The OPA1656 will perform better in many applications.”

To hear Bruno's discussion on OPA1656 scroll forward to 33.01 in the video below.

I have a Boxem 4215/E2 Purifi amp with the TI OPA1656 and a March Audio P452 with the OPA1612. They both sound nice. The OPA1656 would probably be my choice if I had an option. But most listeners won't be able to tell a difference.