Buckeye Amps: New US based Hypex multichannel amplifier builder, line-up announcement!

[Buckeye Amps]

Can you replicate the issue with the speaker terminals/rear panel and wiring to those terminals disconnected completely and directly connected to the amp module itself? The rear panel is steel correct? And those terminals are magnetic/brass?

In short, if you put a module, power supply and your buffer on the bench wired together, not in the chassis, is the issue still present?

Will give this a try, thank you!
The back panel/case is aluminum and the binding post terminals are gold plated (quick connects are brass)

 

[pawsman]

Dylan, I wonder if Purifi will build a power supply that will take full advantage of the 7040sa's current capability (i.e. 950 watts into 2 ohms).
Any thoughts on this? I mean it seems kind of a waste to buy this module, without the power supply to drive it to it's full potential-

pawsman

 

[Buckeye Amps]

Dylan, I wonder if Purifi will build a power supply that will take full advantage of the 7040sa's current capability (i.e. 950 watts into 2 ohms).
Any thoughts on this? I mean it seems kind of a waste to buy this module, without the power supply to drive it to it's full potential-

pawsman

Microaudio builds one that will provide the full power, which I will be offering as an upgrade during purchase hopefully sometime in 2nd quarter.

Regardless of full power or not, the 7040SA is really best suited for sub 4ohm loads. And in that regard, the extra power for 2ohm being lost by using the Purifi is negligible.

 

[pawsman]

Microaudio builds one that will provide the full power, which I will be offering as an upgrade during purchase hopefully sometime in 2nd quarter.

Regardless of full power or not, the 7040SA is really best suited for sub 4ohm loads. And in that regard, the extra power for 2ohm being lost by using the Purifi is negligible.

Thanks, and congrats on the PhD. I'll check back on your site throughout the year-
pawsman

 

[Buckeye Amps]

Thanks, and congrats on the PhD. I'll check back on your site throughout the year-
pawsman

Thanks.
Also, for 4ohm and above loads, the 1ET400 does measure slightly better FWIW

 

[CharlesDickens]

Microaudio builds one that will provide the full power, which I will be offering as an upgrade during purchase hopefully sometime in 2nd quarter.

Regardless of full power or not, the 7040SA is really best suited for sub 4ohm loads. And in that regard, the extra power for 2ohm being lost by using the Purifi is negligible.

I would be interested in that upgrade to the 7040SA, if you choose to make it. My front L/R speakers are a difficult load. I just fried (another) amp on them. The first amp they fried happened many years ago and it was a cheap amp. The latest fried amp was a Sunfire Cinema Grand that was time-limited rated down to 2 ohms but still fried. As an aside, once that Sunfire started getting wonky I pulled it out of the system and tested it with a cheaper (but not cheap) pair of speakers. The Sunfire fed DC to the speakers and fried those too. Anyway, the speakers in question are 1996 Apogee Stages with a nominal 3 ohm impedance and 86db sensitivity. Technically most or all of your offerings should be able to handle the Stages, but being down 2 amps and 1 pair of speakers, I am jaded. Looking for the most robust amp for the 3 ohm Stages that I can afford. Thanks.

 

[Roopster]

Hi,
After reading through the 99 pages over the last week or so, have a question for the gurus here.
Building out a 7.2.4 HT in the basement. Not a dedicated HT. 12 ft wide x 23 ft long (seating at 13 ft) x 8 ft 11 inch height.
In the market for a 8 channels of amplification for the surrounds and atmos
Should I be looking at the Buckeye Hypex NC252MP (8 channel) for the surrounds and atmos or is that overkill?
Also an option to sell the Emotiva XPA3 and replace with a Buckeye Hypex 4 channel (252 or 502 based) or even a Purifi 1ET400A 3 channel

Question is based on components detailed below: -
Pre-Amp/Processor: Marantz AV 7702 (may upgrade to an Anthem AVM70
Speakers:
LR: GoldenEar Triton 3 with built in active subs.
Centre: GoldenEar SuperCenter XXL
Main Surround: GoldenEar SuperSat 50 on wall
Rear Surround: GoldenEar SuperSat 50 on wall (to be acquired)
Atmos: 4x Kef CI160ER (not yet installed so looking to replace with GoldenEar Invisa 650's or HTR 7000's
Amp: Emotiva XPA-3 gen 2 driving LCR

 

[Audiomn]

Hi,
After reading through the 99 pages over the last week or so, have a question for the gurus here.
Building out a 7.2.4 HT in the basement. Not a dedicated HT. 12 ft wide x 23 ft long (seating at 13 ft) x 8 ft 11 inch height.
In the market for a 8 channels of amplification for the surrounds and atmos
Should I be looking at the Buckeye Hypex NC252MP (8 channel) for the surrounds and atmos or is that overkill?
Also an option to sell the Emotiva XPA3 and replace with a Buckeye Hypex 4 channel (252 or 502 based) or even a Purifi 1ET400A 3 channel

Question is based on components detailed below: -
Pre-Amp/Processor: Marantz AV 7702 (may upgrade to an Anthem AVM70
Speakers:
LR: GoldenEar Triton 3 with built in active subs.
Centre: GoldenEar SuperCenter XXL
Main Surround: GoldenEar SuperSat 50 on wall
Rear Surround: GoldenEar SuperSat 50 on wall (to be acquired)
Atmos: 4x Kef CI160ER (not yet installed so looking to replace with GoldenEar Invisa 650's or HTR 7000's
Amp: Emotiva XPA-3 gen 2 driving LCR

I’m setting mine up similarly with an AKM DAC Denon x3700h, KEF R3/R2c fronts, 4x KEF CI4100QL-THX sides, and 4x KEF CI200QR Atmos speakers. I’m using a single SVS SB-16 Ultra subwoofer (it’s pretty even in my space with just 1). For amps im using a Buckeye 3x Purifi and a Buckeye 8x Hypex 252.

I’m almost done finishing construction and will post calibration and initial impressions soon, hopefully!

 

[Audiomn]

Congrats on the doctorate, Dylan! A graduate degree is a LONG haul and takes an amazing amount of perseverance and hard work. I stopped at a master’s that took me 7 years and have enormous respect for anyone who completes a doctorate. Well done!

 

[Buckeye Amps]

Finally took decent pictures of the speakON and Rack Case options (people have been inquiring for pictures lately)

 

[Vernonscriven]

Very nice! Looks like the one I have ordered. It will look great in the rack.

 

[Buckeye Amps]

For those who have been following the Purifi distortion issue disovered during the 3ch Purifi review in December and see that we have identified the culrpit (the speaker binding post tab), just want to make it known that every order (whether Purifi or Hypex) that is being assembled/fulfilled as of today will have new tabs/the culprit replaced. So no worries.

For those with previous Hypex orders, I will have a more extensive post on what part(s) you can order or replace yourself if you feel inclined. I can say with confidence that changing the tabs WILL NOT improve sound though, so please do not fret. The NC252 and NC502 reviews of my amps by Amir from 2020 and 2021 that got his approval used the same binding post tabs.

 

[FlyingFreak]

For those who have been following the Purifi distortion issue disovered during the 3ch Purifi review in December and see that we have identified the culrpit (the speaker binding post tab), just want to make it known that every order (whether Purifi or Hypex) that is being assembled/fulfilled as of today will have new tabs/the culprit replaced. So no worries.

For those with previous Hypex orders, I will have a more extensive post on what part(s) you can order or replace yourself if you feel inclined. I can say with confidence that changing the tabs WILL NOT improve sound though, so please do not fret. The NC252 and NC502 reviews of my amps by Amir from 2020 and 2021 that got his approval used the same binding post tabs.

Great news! Must be a relief having identified the issue.
Looking forward to following posts getting into what can be done and how to 'fix' our amps.

 

[xaxxon]

For those who have been following the Purifi distortion issue disovered during the 3ch Purifi review in December and see that we have identified the culrpit (the speaker binding post tab), just want to make it known that every order (whether Purifi or Hypex) that is being assembled/fulfilled as of today will have new tabs/the culprit replaced. So no worries.

For those with previous Hypex orders, I will have a more extensive post on what part(s) you can order or replace yourself if you feel inclined. I can say with confidence that changing the tabs WILL NOT improve sound though, so please do not fret. The NC252 and NC502 reviews of my amps by Amir from 2020 and 2021 that got his approval used the same binding post tabs.

Is there a simplified description you can write of how binding post tabs cause this type of issue and why they showed up on the purifi amps but not the hypex ones using the same ones? Really confused/curious.

Thanks.

edit: never mind.

Buckeye 3 Channel Purifi Amp Review

Looks as though Buckeye's buffer designer also had a dummy load issue. I talked to him today and found he was using some PE dummy loads. I had bought the same ones and returned them. I found they could not be used for measuring low distortion situations. Might have found this sooner but we had...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Buckeye Amps]

Is there a simplified description you can write of how binding post tabs cause this type of issue and why they showed up on the purifi amps but not the hypex ones using the same ones? Really confused/curious.

Thanks.

I know you found the post in that thread but to reiterate:

The tabs that come on the binding posts from the manufacturer are steel (despite the product description and the rest of the binding post assembly being non-steel). At higher load testing and at very low levels of THD-N, the steel can introduce distortion, as it is a ferromagentic material. This was very obvious on the Purifi review due to the known behavior of the Purifi modules not exhibiting any early rise in distortion when performing optimally.

For the early reviews/tests of my Hypex builds by Amir when I first started business, the issue was masked due to the somewhat inherent behavior of the Hypex NCxxxMP series having an early rise in distortion, mainly noticeable on the NC502MP (can confirm by looking at the Hypex datasheet). Nothing that would ever be audible and the behavior exhbitied by the steel tabs on the Hypex reviews was so sublte above baseline performance it was not noted as impacting recommendation/performance.

So replacement of the tabs by Hypex owners is purely for "peace of mind" and will have no impact on audible performance.

 

[AdamG]

I know you found the post in that thread but to reiterate:

The tabs that come on the binding posts from the manufacturer are steel (despite the product description and the rest of the binding post assembly being non-steel). At higher load testing and at very low levels of THD-N, the steel can introduce distortion, as it is a ferromagentic material. This was very obvious on the Purifi review due to the known behavior of the Purifi modules not exhibiting any early rise in distortion when performing optimally.

For the early reviews/tests of my Hypex builds by Amir when I first started business, the issue was masked due to the somewhat inherent behavior of the Hypex NCxxxMP series having an early rise in distortion, mainly noticeable on the NC502MP (can confirm by looking at the Hypex datasheet). Nothing that would ever be audible and the behavior exhbitied by the steel tabs on the Hypex reviews was so sublte above baseline performance it was not noted as impacting recommendation/performance.

So replacement of the tabs by Hypex owners is purely for "peace of mind" and will have no impact on audible performance.

Oh no! Now I hear it…Didn’t before but now I do!


Yeah no not really. JK

 

[xaxxon]

I know you found the post in that thread but to reiterate:

The tabs that come on the binding posts from the manufacturer are steel (despite the product description and the rest of the binding post assembly being non-steel). At higher load testing and at very low levels of THD-N, the steel can introduce distortion, as it is a ferromagentic material. This was very obvious on the Purifi review due to the known behavior of the Purifi modules not exhibiting any early rise in distortion when performing optimally.

For the early reviews/tests of my Hypex builds by Amir when I first started business, the issue was masked due to the somewhat inherent behavior of the Hypex NCxxxMP series having an early rise in distortion, mainly noticeable on the NC502MP (can confirm by looking at the Hypex datasheet). Nothing that would ever be audible and the behavior exhbitied by the steel tabs on the Hypex reviews was so sublte above baseline performance it was not noted as impacting recommendation/performance.

So replacement of the tabs by Hypex owners is purely for "peace of mind" and will have no impact on audible performance.

Sounds like it was essentially a comedy of errors that allowed this to creep through... if any one of five things hadn't happened amir wouldn't have gotten an amp with this issue to test. Either there wouldn't have been a problem in the first place or it would have been caught early.

*sigh*

 

[Too Many Notes]

Sounds like it was essentially a comedy of errors that allowed this to creep through... if any one of five things hadn't happened amir wouldn't have gotten an amp with this issue to test. Either there wouldn't have been a problem in the first place or it would have been caught early.

*sigh*

I wouldn't take it too hard. The takeaway I'm getting here is that it's a non-issue if you have Hypex modules. The level of distortion introduced via the steel is not significantly higher than the "normal" baseline distortion inherent to NC502MP modules. This is why it went undetected before and Amir gave the Buckeye Hypex amp his recomendation; it performed at the expected level despite the steel tabs. Even with the "fix" applied, the NC502MP module would remain a bottleneck. The modules themselves are incapable of giving you much more.

Contrast this with the ability of Purifi modules to reach relatively lower distortion levels, where the difference between baseline distortion and steel-induced distortion is greater. Remove the steel tabs and distortion drops more significantly. Being capable of significantly lower distortion, the modules can take advantage of the situation. Whether any of these differences in distortion are audible is entirely another question, one in which I suspect the answer is "probably not." But I'm new around here, so what do I know?

By not recommending the Buckeye Purifi at this time, and I suspect this will change upon retesting, Amir failed it for performing below spec (so to speak). It would be interesting to see which amps remain recommended that are more expensive and perform worse. I am guessing a few, which is why I disagree with Amir's current blanket non-recommendation on the Buckeye Purifi, but that is a topic for another day.

Personally, I went with Purifi because it runs cooler and thus will hopefully last longer, not because I think it's going to sound better. I still want "the fix" applied since technically I am paying for its better performance capabilities. From this point of view, I understand the reasoning behind the negative review, but I would also advocate an approach of keeping things in perspective.

 

[Buckeye Amps]

Disregard

 

[Vernonscriven]

Very nice! Looks like the one I have ordered. It will look great in the rack.