Try it, make a comparison and make your decision what to use. It is not about you seeing the benefits or not.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
boXem ARTHUR 2408/N2 Teardown (Class D Amp)
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2020
- Messages
- 6,284
- Likes
- 5,670
I wouldn't have questioned if I haven't.
I was simply questioning the rational behind using many different connectors and connections. Isn't it logical to use the most appropriate and the most direct transmission line for any signal transfer? Here we have a PCB, a PCB connector, a ribbon cable and its connectors. I cannot see any constraints for having to use them either. Instead I can see that it is possible to use a single twisted pair ribbon cable to connect the amplifier board with the input sense board. No PCB, and two less connectors. Better connection and cheaper to boot.
I appreciate if you can tell me why you think this is not a better solution or why it is not possible on this instance.
Last edited:
For incorporating various different modules, all Boxem has to do is make up short indiviudual IDC ribbons, instead of custom lengths of shielded cables for each module type. There's a second header next to the one he's using (partially hidden I think).
Consistency in performance with no vagaries and measure/move wires/tie-down/improve/rinse/repeat. Movement of a few mm can make a huge difference with shielded cables at these low levels. He's found the best routes for the lowest noise and locked them in with a PCB.
One other good reason to use a PCB to bridge from the ribbon cable is strain relief. Despite improvements when using the Ghent connector, twisted-pair (tp) cables (like Mogami wire) place more force on the ribbon cable connector. This is why you see some implementations taping the connector in place. I suspect a volume producer would hot glue or use something to retain the connector.
Despite the apparent robustness of tp wiring, my experience after building several Hypex amps is that the heavier wire can pull the connector away from the header. Without strain relief, the result is marginal connection that can reduce output and/or introduce hum.
For my next builds, I plan to use the eval board as it adapts the ribbon cable connections to input connectors with locking retention. So, even without needing to repurpose a one case for different size modules, Boxem‘s PCB provides a better system solution in my experience.
Despite the apparent robustness of tp wiring, my experience after building several Hypex amps is that the heavier wire can pull the connector away from the header. Without strain relief, the result is marginal connection that can reduce output and/or introduce hum.
For my next builds, I plan to use the eval board as it adapts the ribbon cable connections to input connectors with locking retention. So, even without needing to repurpose a one case for different size modules, Boxem‘s PCB provides a better system solution in my experience.
Last edited:
I came to the same conclusion and I am expecting this EB to be delivered on Monday.
Indeed, but sometimes 'small' isn't 'beautiful' but just 'too small'!
I think it's correct.
In terms of the minimum number of contacts and the shortest signal path, the best is to connect one TP shielded wire for each channel directly to the input board and the IDC terminal of hypex. (When increasing the distance) If do not like the movement of the cable or the external force of the connection part, fix the cable properly.
The other means is a compromise.
In the case of products, of course, there are other factors that need to be considered besides the simplicity of the audio signal path, and the overall judgment depends on the designer.
The implementation of ARTHUR2408/N2 seems to be one of the optimal solutions.
So I go for a drink with friends on the saturday evening, come back home and see a question when checking my emails, decide that it is not a good idea to deal with it while not *exactly* sober, and the day after I see that you guys brilliantly handled it. Love this forum
57gold
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2021
- Messages
- 83
- Likes
- 79
Thanks. Probably because I was babbling about wanting to see Luxembourg...
If I had my wish, it would be for a stereo amp, one box instead of two, but looks like your current casework would lead to a mono amp format to fit new amp unit and adequate power supply to deliver up to 40 amps current or 950 watts at 2 ohms.
If I had my wish, it would be for a stereo amp, one box instead of two, but looks like your current casework would lead to a mono amp format to fit new amp unit and adequate power supply to deliver up to 40 amps current or 950 watts at 2 ohms.
57gold
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2021
- Messages
- 83
- Likes
- 79
No electronics manufacture experience here, in fact I burn myself every time I get near a soldering iron.
But, if one can install a 500 watt per channel @ 4 ohms with 40 amps current capacity, relatively cool operating, high efficiency, weighs 10-12 kilos, offers the lowest noise/distortion and most accurate frequency response in the world built in a box the size of a 75-100 watt per channel class AB amp...that's a winner of a product, even if it is larger than your company's cool looking small cases.
May be wrong, but as an audio/music fan for 50 years, I harbor no doubts in this regard.
But, if one can install a 500 watt per channel @ 4 ohms with 40 amps current capacity, relatively cool operating, high efficiency, weighs 10-12 kilos, offers the lowest noise/distortion and most accurate frequency response in the world built in a box the size of a 75-100 watt per channel class AB amp...that's a winner of a product, even if it is larger than your company's cool looking small cases.
May be wrong, but as an audio/music fan for 50 years, I harbor no doubts in this regard.
Last edited:
From my point of view, you are absolutely right. And the bigger case allows for higher continuous rated power and also fits to a main home system that is not based on small boxes. IMO there is a market, though not very big, for such product.
Do you plan to send these more powerful models for review?
Judging from the specs I have high expectations
I wonder how the gain switch will influence the measurements.
And also how the issue with distortion at high frequencies was handled compared to this (?) prototype from Purify https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...easurements-of-purifi-1et400a-amplifier.7984/
You did not know Wonder Woman could solder?
Similar threads
