Buckeye Amps 2024 News and Upcoming Products

[ryanosaur]

What are those? Thanks.

Just some other class d options out there, like Pascal and Ice. *shrugs

 

[Billy Budapest]

Just some other class d options out there, like Pascal and Ice. *shrugs

Got it!

 

[daniboun]

What are those? Thanks.

Sylph audio FB100 and FB360 will be reviewed by Amir soon.
For the 3E Audio check the ASR review online)

 

[Buckeye Amps]

We are happy to announce we will be sponsoring and attending MWAVE again this year (and I 100% plan on being there in person this time).

Our plan is to officially showcase the working/retail model of the 2ch Integrated at that time. I will also be brining along the new Gen 2 Purifi Eigentakt monoblock and the 2kW Hypex monoblock we are finally adding to the lineup.

I am also toying with the idea of adding a small apparel lineup to the website, so I may bring some t shirt giveaways with me as well.

 

[shion_ca]

We are happy to announce we will be sponsoring and attending MWAVE again this year (and I 100% plan on being there in person this time).

Our plan is to officially showcase the working/retail model of the 2ch Integrated at that time. I will also be brining along the new Gen 2 Purifi Eigentakt monoblock and the 2kW Hypex monoblock we are finally adding to the lineup.

I am also toying with the idea of adding a small apparel lineup to the website, so I may bring some t shirt giveaways with me as well.

Will the 9040 make an appearance?!?

 

[Buckeye Amps]

Will the 9040 make an appearance?!?

Yes

 

[mocenigo]

The 9040 mono (from us, at least) will be around $1050 shipped unless something changes for the worse.

Which buffer?

 

[Buckeye Amps]

Which buffer?

OPA 1612. Still not planning on jumping on the wagon of marketing other buffers for more money when objectively it is not at all necessary.

 

[Matias]

Why the OPA 1612 when Bruno recommends the OPA 1656? Should be similar priced.

 

[Buckeye Amps]

Why the OPA 1612 when Bruno recommends the OPA 1656? Should be similar priced.

The large quantity of the 1612 we have on hand.
Just hasn't been something to switch to yet, more pertinent things first.

 

[mocenigo]

OPA 1612. Still not planning on jumping on the wagon of marketing other buffers for more money when objectively it is not at all necessary.

No composite buffers like the Neurochrome? A single 1612 has a noise of about 1.2μV over the audio band. Add the gain of the 1ET9040BA and this becomes roughly 6.8μV. The total noise, added to the 4.6μV intrinsic to the Purifi module, would then be around 8.2μV. I think an even quieter topology would be needed to give justice to the 1ET9040BA. I know I am splitting hair… or rather splitting electrons…

 

[Buckeye Amps]

No composite buffers like the Neurochrome? A single 1612 has a noise of about 1.2μV over the audio band. Add the gain of the 1ET9040BA and this becomes roughly 6.8μV. The total noise, added to the 4.6μV intrinsic to the Purifi module, would then be around 8.2μV. I think an even quieter topology would be needed to give justice to the 1ET9040BA. I know I am splitting hair… or rather splitting electrons…

For measuring, sure but since we are at levels of inaudible differences it just isn't necessary at this time.

 

[goryu]

For measuring, sure but since we are at levels of inaudible differences it just isn't necessary at this time.

By that argument, the new Purifi amp isn't needed either. Many want it because of the excellence of it's measured performance regardless of whether or not that extra few dB is audible. Putting it out with anything less than a comparable buffer is doing it a disservice.

 

[Buckeye Amps]

By that argument, the new Purifi amp isn't needed either. Many want it because of the excellence of it's measured performance regardless of whether or not that extra few dB is audible. Putting it out with anything less than a comparable buffer is doing it a disservice.

I'll gladly submit my offering for measurement and allow people to make an informed decision just like I have always tried to do.

 

[pogo]

Many want it because of the excellence of it's measured performance regardless of whether or not that extra few dB is audible.

There are a few extra purifi dB that you can definitely hear. Listen to two bridged 1ET400A. Implemented in NAD or Lyngdorf devices, they have twice as much power at 8/4 ohms as a 1ET9040BA. That is amazing

 

[mocenigo]

For measuring, sure but since we are at levels of inaudible differences it just isn't necessary at this time.

I agree on audibility, but there are also bragging rights

By that argument, the new Purifi amp isn't needed either. Many want it because of the excellence of it's measured performance regardless of whether or not that extra few dB is audible. Putting it out with anything less than a comparable buffer is doing it a disservice.

To be complete fair to Buckeye, they are two reasons to buy a 9040 based amp: 1) lower noise and distortion and 2) more power and stability on very difficult loads.

The choice of buffer topology does not affect point 2). At the same time, point 1) is obviously still achieved with a 1612-based buffer with respect to any implementation of a 1ET400A, 1ET7040A, NCoreX, or Nilai based power amp. But, yeah, it could be improved.

 

[Buckeye Amps]

There are a few extra purifi dB that you can definitely hear. Listen to two bridged 1ET400A. Implemented in NAD or Lyngdorf devices, they have twice as much power at 8/4 ohms as a 1ET9040BA. That is amazing

An increase in power output leading to sound level increase (dB) is definitely something one can hear.

I've been referring to dB in terms of distortion differences. A couple of dB difference in this respect at the levels Purifi is achieving is absolutely measurable...but is it audible?

 

[pogo]

But there seems to be another kind of distortion: Link
It could even be that the bridge mode of two 1ET400A sounds better than one 1ET9040BA. I will gather listening experiences in the near future.

 

[Buckeye Amps]

But there seems to be another kind of distortion: Link
It could even be that the bridge mode of two 1ET400A sounds better than one 1ET9040BA. I will gather listening experiences in the near future.

I've learned to not debate subjective listening experiences. Other than to say I'm glad you enjoy it.

 

[Julf]

But there seems to be another kind of distortion: Link.

I think the key word there is "seems". Until the subjective perceptions are verified objectively, I would classify it as in the enormous category "subjective perceptions that don't necessarily correlate with physical properties of the sound waves".