BUCKEYEAMPS Hypex NCx500 Amplifier 2channel Review

[ommadusk]

Really sad words to me.

Graph seems similar means 1. Measurements are reproducible. 2. DUT also make reproducible result as well. <- nice 3. Data can be compared
The ultimate goal is to obtain exactly the same values from exactly the same measurements. <- impossible.

I still vividly remember what a catastrophe it was when I made detailed comments.

1. There are many things I don't know well, so the quality of the explanation is low.
2. I come into conflict with people with different views.
3. The more I increase the explanation, the more likely I express things more non-objective. Because I am 'person' (=imperfaction)

However, data is simply data, if the measurement conditions are specified, and anyone can interpret it in any way they wish.

I'd like to say thank you for the review. I liked seeing lots of graphs. It looks like Amir has competition ;-) Yes, it would be nice also to have some more writing in the review but it takes more time to do that. How long does it take to do a test and present the results? A long time I expect.

I've got an Audiophonics NCX500 stereo amp so I'm interested in the power supply failure. It would be nice to know it didn't catch fire?? I hope you're able to review it with a new PSU.

 

[Deleted member 48726]

Why? They don't represent mine and just about anybody's use cases. The only situation I can think of that an amplifier will run at full rated power with a single frequency sine wave is on a test bench, which isn't the intended use case for an audio amplifier. The capabilities you mentioned don't come for free. Why should everyone be burdened with the extra cost for capabilities practically no one will use?

Because it means that the Thermal Dissipation Power is taken into consideration during the sizing of fans and heatsink. Many CPU's and GPU's run at 100 % TDP when gaming for example. It is just expected that they can dissipate the heat from the power supply and chip. Why would you expect otherwise? It is not an edge case at all.
Years ago when I worked with AutoDesk Inventor and wasn't docked in at the office, my laptop GPU would run 100 % for up to 6 hours / day on complex 3D models of buildings, plants etc.

The analogy IR to engines wasn't one I did originally. I just wanted to state that any engine that can't run at full power in longer sessions is a shit engine. Same is valid for engines used as power generators on ships or as emergency backup gensets. Or electric motors used on pumps. Air compressors etc. All designed for 100 % load or more continously / indefinately.

If it breaks down at full rated load within its operating range, no matter the type of machine, it is a poorly designed machine and it should be derated.

 

[Deleted member 48726]

I'd like to say thank you for the review. I liked seeing lots of graphs. It looks like Amir has competition ;-) Yes, it would be nice also to have some more writing in the review but it takes more time to do that. How long does it take to do a test and present down the results? A long time I expect.

I've got an Audiophonics NCX500 stereo amp so I'm interested in the power supply failure. It would be nice to know it didn't catch fire?? I hope you're able to review it with a new PSU.

I don't mind the "wall of graphs" as most of them speak for themselves and can be compared to others when in doubt. Otherwise questions and comments can be made in the review thread. A big "thumbs up" from me.

 

[levimax]

The main issue here is not that though.Issue is the protections should anything happens,from a high power demand to a power grid shutdown,etc.
In tested amp that failed.

The whole "protection should have saved the PS" argument is interesting. The previously posted specs of the PS clearly state there is no current overload protection and to not operate it beyond specifications. It is is easy to say "just add better protection" but that is much easier said than done. People seem to think protection circuits are easy and or benign to performance / sound quality but that is not always the case. Is it really in the consumer's interest to add protection circuitry that costs extra money and reduces performance of the amp and may cause unnecessary shut downs if while playing music there will never be an issue and the only reason is to protect from full power sine waves? I am not sure. While many here understand it well others may not be as clear as to how different a full power HF sine wave is compared to anything in music.

 

[NTK]

II just wanted to state that any engine that can't run at full power in longer sessions is a shit engine.

Then don't ever step on an airplane again. Do you know how long a jet engine last when running at full take-off power?

 

[Deleted member 48726]

The whole "protection should have saved the PS" argument is interesting. The previously posted specs of the PS clearly state there is no current overload protection and to not operate it beyond specifications. It is is easy to say "just add better protection" but that is much easier said than done. People seem to think protection circuits are easy and or benign to performance / sound quality but that is not always the case. Is it really in the consumer's interest to add protection circuitry that costs extra money and reduces performance of the amp and may cause unnecessary shut downs if while playing music there will never be an issue and the only reason is to protect from full power sine waves? I am not sure. While many here understand it well others may not be as clear as to how different a full power HF sine wave is compared to anything in music.

Yeah yeah,, crest factor sine vs complex waveforms. But aren't all amplifier ratings not based upon sine waves though?

 

[Sokel]

The previously posted specs of the PS clearly state there is no current overload protection

On the contrary,as I posted a little earlier in the tread (just a few posts above the one you quoted) current is stated as "guarded" (see the screenshot).
I can't think of a stronger expression to state a condition of safety (the lamp when we first test a diy amp does exactly that) but then again English is not one of my languages.

Edit:link to screenshot

 

[peng]

100%.

Again, I think the standard put in by the FTC needs to be voluntarily re adopted.



You don’t have to be burdened. You can get the Nc252mp, a used NC400 or NC500. There are tiered options for sure.

The analogy is a DAC with 120 dB SINAD versus 100 dB SINAD. Why pay extra when practically no one will use the extra THD+N? You’re right that you don’t need the power being advertised — but you really should not be advertising something that isn’t true.

Hypex stated clearly that the 700 W rating was not continuous. Regarless, there are very few manufacturers that specify continuous power output that is continuous indefinitely. Most of them, use that term without clearly stating the condition/duration. Do you have an amp that actually say what its literally continuous, non stop output rating is? Again, there are some, but very few that I am aware of.

 

[sarumbear]

You ask them. They want you to use them with their modules and see no other applications for them. That's what they tested and that's what they advertised. You are allowed to not agree.

View attachment 303979

Why would I ask them? I should ask the amplifier manufacturer. Its not Hypex is it on the case?

 

[Sokel]

Hypex stated clearly that the 700 W rating was not continuous. Regarless, there are very few manufacturers that specify continuous power output that is continuous indefinitely. Most of them, use that term without clearly stating the condition/duration. Do you have an amp that actually say what its literally continuous, non stop output rating is? Again, there are some, but very few that I am aware of.

Here's an example:

https://shop.icepoweraudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/ICEpower1200AS1-2-Datasheet_1_7.pdf

But yes,there are few.

 

[PeteL]

Why would I ask them? I should ask the amplifier manufacturer. Its not Hypex is it on the case?

??? I am confused now. The discussion was about Hypex Datasheets.

 

[sarumbear]

??? I am confused now. The discussion was about Hypex Datasheets.

The discussion is about the BUCKEYEAMPS' power rating and failure.

 

[PeteL]

The discussion is about the BUCKEYEAMPS' power rating and failure.

OK, there are a few discussions in parallel. You may have answered to the wrong one. We where talking as the SMPS poorly specified in your views.

 

[sarumbear]

Then don't ever step on an airplane again. Do you know how long a jet engine last when running at full take-off power?

And your point is?

 

[sarumbear]

OK, there are a few discussions in parallel. You may have answered to the wrong one.

Not the wrong one but to the correct one as the title clearly says.

 

[Rick Sykora]

How all this ended up to power needs?

perhaps because the OP sprinkles this statement throughout his measurements…

*This amplifier fails to repeatedly achieve top power of the right end of this graph.
Drive this amplifier to near 700 W as officially rated can cause serious irreversible damage.

and the ASR membership has many reasons this needs more specification!

The main issue here is not that though.Issue is the protections should anything happens,from a high power demand to a power grid shutdown,etc.
In tested amp that failed.
That's what must concern us and how to solve it,thankfully we have members here with decades of experience.

As you posted earlier, this power supply is designed to drive more than one amp module and the expected outcome is simply lower power output per channel. I have verified this behavior occurs at 1kHz with 2 and 4 ohm loads. So unless something undetected occurred, seems likely the supply was defective. I note that the review indicates the amp took 32 minutes to stabilize. That seems very odd as would expect almost instantaneous stabilization. Will see what Hypex finds and await Amir’s review. Or perhaps the OP will get some different results with the replacement supply. Did he confirm that he plans to retest?

 

[sarumbear]

Hypex stated clearly that the 700 W rating was not continuous. Regarless, there are very few manufacturers that specify continuous power output that is continuous indefinitely. Most of them, use that term without clearly stating the condition/duration. Do you have an amp that actually say what its literally continuous, non stop output rating is? Again, there are some, but very few that I am aware of.

They didn’t say that for the amplifier. They said for the SMPS. Their amplifiers can deliver the rated power if you can cool them. It’s their power supply that is limited. It’s also the power supply that failed in this test.

It’s Hypex’s confusing specs that cause the issue. They do not offer a full amplifier spec.

 

[Deleted member 48726]

Then don't ever step on an airplane again. Do you know how long a jet engine last when running at full take-off power?

I have no idea.
I'd guess it depends on the engine rating. And that take off thrust isn't being rated as "continous" by the manufacturer but rather a short period of peak power.

 

[GXAlan]

The comment you are expressing 100% agreement with says an amp needs to be able to run at full power indefinitely. The FTC standard you are advocating for says an amp needs to be able to run at full power for 5 minutes.

If you say

“100W continuous” = indefinite. Heat generated by amp is dissipated by the heatsinks at a faster rate from ambient air. But you can do it at 1 kHz and 1% THD or whatever. This lets companies flexibility for conditions, except for the definition of continuous.

“100W (FTC, 20 Hz to 20 kHz, 0.1% THD)”

Then that is “at least 5 minutes” but this has to be “obtainable at all frequencies within the rated power band without exceeding the rated maximum percentage of total harmonic distortion after input signals at said frequencies have been continuously applied at full rated power for not less than five (5) minutes at the amplifier's auxiliary input”

 

[sarumbear]

As you posted earlier, this power supply is designed to drive more than one amp module and the expected outcome is simply lower power output per channel.

They said the SMPS will fail if limits are breached. See their notice at the top.

Did he confirm that he plans to retest?

He did.