• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Buckeye Amps: Purifi 1ET6525SA (the successor to the 1ET400A)

Why not build your own. Then you'll have the exact configuration you want.

Hard to justify building your own when there are companies offering these amps for less than the cost of the parts. If the manufacturers offered the modules for the price they give the assemblers it would be a no brainer.
 
- OPA1612
- speakON only for rackmount case
- Hypex SMPS1200A100 standard, Micro Audio SMPS upgrqde available
- TBD for idle wattage
- likely $1150
For budgeting purposes, what’s your guess for one with the Micro Audio upgrade?
 
I'm going to look at a used pair of the monoblocks, is there any way to tell if they do or don't have the problematic binding posts from amir's original 3 channel review?
 
I'm going to look at a used pair of the monoblocks, is there any way to tell if they do or don't have the problematic binding posts from amir's original 3 channel review?
Not without opening it up or asking the owner.
And as far as usage, the steel binding posts do bot affect real world usage/audible difference.
 
Thanks for the quick reply. What about a serial number run or production/purchase date range?
 
Thanks for the quick reply. What about a serial number run or production/purchase date range?
Any amp purchased before Feb 2023 had the steel tabs but most of the owners also opted to have me ship replacement binding posts to correct them.
 
Is this your line that is changing or something to do with the Purifi 1ET400A modules themselves?
With the Purifi modules themselves.

Just waiting on the OK from Purifi to share full details. Needless to say it won't be too long.
 
Yes. The SMPS1k can have pumping if used on full range speakers under 30/40Hz. The Capacitor board eliminates this.

Why not simply invert one channel with respect to the other and reverse it at the loudspeaker terminals in a stereo amp. Bass content is pretty much always in phase and that way, you pull from opposite rails.
NAD have done that (and still do) for many decades. It is a classic way to use an underrated power supply and get away with it. Also, channel separation can improve as bonus, depending on how you test it.
It also costs nothing...
 
Why not simply invert one channel with respect to the other and reverse it at the loudspeaker terminals in a stereo amp. Bass content is pretty much always in phase and that way, you pull from opposite rails.
NAD have done that (and still do) for many decades. It is a classic way to use an underrated power supply and get away with it. Also, channel separation can improve as bonus, depending on how you test it.
It also costs nothing...
If it was a stereo amp build, of course.
 
Back
Top Bottom