Hypex NCx500 Class D Amplifier Review

[Chanur]

There will be no sonic difference at all, unless you have batman ears..

That's kind of what I figured and let's me save a bit of money.

 

[amper42]

Is there any audible difference between the Purifi amps and these NcoreX models? It seems like specs on both are so good it won't make a difference.

Both Purifi and Hypex amps sound great. What you get with the Purifi is approx. 35% better energy efficiency at low to medium playback levels. The Purifi will also run cool while NcoreX will heat up and stay warm even when idle. This makes the Purifi ideal for cabinet use or areas where equipment is in tight spaces. While I will stack equipment on top of a Purifi amp, I would rather not do so with a Hypex amp.
I can't hear a difference between these two, but after 60 minutes of operation I can easily detect a difference in heat between the two amp cases.

 

[Descartes]

Both Purifi and Hypex amps sound great. What you get with the Purifi is approx. 35% better energy efficiency at low to medium playback levels. The Purifi will also run cool while NcoreX will heat up and stay warm even when idle. This makes the Purifi ideal for cabinet use or areas where equipment is in tight spaces. While I will stack equipment on top of a Purifi amp, I would rather not do so with a Hypex amp.
I can't hear a difference between these two, but after 60 minutes of operation I can easily detect a difference in heat between the two amp cases.

Didn’t know that! Aren’t they both digital amplifiers that are supposed to be extremely efficient?

 

[Julf]

Didn’t know that! Aren’t they both digital amplifiers that are supposed to be extremely efficient?

Both are extremely efficient compared to traditional class A/B amps (not to mention pure class A). That doesn't mean there aren't differences between different class D implementations.

By the way, neither Purifi nor Hypex are digital amplifiers. They are analog pulse width/pulse density modulation amplifiers.

 

[amper42]

Didn’t know that! Aren’t they both digital amplifiers that are supposed to be extremely efficient?

The Purifi design is the energy/heat champion. A Purifi Stereo amp uses approx. 15W while idle and 16W at normal 75dB listening levels.
In comparison, the Hypex amp design will use approximately 23W while idle and 24W at normal 75dB listening levels.

While the numbers are small its about a 35% improvement of energy use with the Purifi design.
The excess energy use in the Hypex design translates into higher case heat.

 

[Matias]

Is there any audible difference between the Purifi amps and these NcoreX models? It seems like specs on both are so good it won't make a difference.

It was what I asked here and got my conclusions on the following page.

Apollon 1ET6525SA ST Amplifier Review

Cool, I stand corrected, thanks! ... so that means one can rate their power amps at any distortion level that must not exceed 1%, correct? This change just happened in the 2024 revision, and it was prompted by a comment from our friend Dennis Murphy of Philharmonic Audio :) For the 1% THD+N...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Ropeburn]

None except that you can place the monoblocks closer to the speakers reducing the speaker cable distances!

So you can utilise a little more of that ludicrous theoretical damping factor of over 9000!

 

[Ropeburn]

There will be no sonic difference at all, unless you have batman ears..

Batman is a human. You mean Manbat.

This dude scoffs at your ludicrously bad stereo that can't even do 50kHz properly but starts breaking up at 30. Silly humans and their idea of "high res"!

 

[cavedriver]

Both Purifi and Hypex amps sound great. What you get with the Purifi is approx. 35% better energy efficiency at low to medium playback levels. The Purifi will also run cool while NcoreX will heat up and stay warm even when idle. This makes the Purifi ideal for cabinet use or areas where equipment is in tight spaces. While I will stack equipment on top of a Purifi amp, I would rather not do so with a Hypex amp.
I can't hear a difference between these two, but after 60 minutes of operation I can easily detect a difference in heat between the two amp cases.

Not sure this is the case with all Hypex amps. The NC502MP amp I have runs so cool I wonder if it's even on. Granted that's not the latest NcoreX amp but still, it's so cool I leave it on. Draws a measured ~24 watts at idle though, just as you've reported, which I wish were a little lower.

 

[Matias]

Not sure this is the case with all Hypex amps. The NC502MP amp I have runs so cool I wonder if it's even on. Granted that's not the latest NcoreX amp but still, it's so cool I leave it on. Draws a measured ~24 watts at idle though, just as you've reported, which I wish were a little lower.

IMO everyone should switch off the amplifier when not in use, as Apollon explains here too.

Apollon 1ET6525SA ST Amplifier Review

Can anyone explain all the different options that they offer in regards to the amplifiers What is OPA? - OPA 1656 - Sonic Imagery 994 (+100.00€) - Sparkos Labs SS2590 PRO (+200.00€) Also is the difference in pricing just the box when comparing Purifi 1ET9040BA?

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[cavedriver]

IMO everyone should switch off the amplifier when not in use, as Apollon explains here too.

Apollon 1ET6525SA ST Amplifier Review

Can anyone explain all the different options that they offer in regards to the amplifiers What is OPA? - OPA 1656 - Sonic Imagery 994 (+100.00€) - Sparkos Labs SS2590 PRO (+200.00€) Also is the difference in pricing just the box when comparing Purifi 1ET9040BA?

www.audiosciencereview.com

I don't disagree, the problem is I have an early production 502MP (or the firmware setup is botched) and there is a significant audible pop when I turn it on or off that I'm afraid could damage my tweeters.

 

[Chanur]

Both Purifi and Hypex amps sound great. What you get with the Purifi is approx. 35% better energy efficiency at low to medium playback levels. The Purifi will also run cool while NcoreX will heat up and stay warm even when idle. This makes the Purifi ideal for cabinet use or areas where equipment is in tight spaces. While I will stack equipment on top of a Purifi amp, I would rather not do so with a Hypex amp.
I can't hear a difference between these two, but after 60 minutes of operation I can easily detect a difference in heat between the two amp cases.

I'm putting mine in a cabinet so I'll definitely do the Purifi then. Important info thank you!!

 

[Ropeburn]

I don't disagree, the problem is I have an early production 502MP (or the firmware setup is botched) and there is a significant audible pop when I turn it on or off that I'm afraid could damage my tweeters.

If it's just a regular spike and not heavy DC shift, it won't do a thing. Tweeters can handle way louder impulses.

 

[antcollinet]

None except that you can place the monoblocks closer to the speakers reducing the speaker cable distances!

At the expense of longer line level interconnects. And since it is far easier to degrade sound over long line level interconnections (especially unbalanced) than it is over appropriately sized (cross sectional area) speaker cable lengths, then the argument in favour (in my opinion) is weak.

 

[TemploAztlan]

At the expense of longer line level interconnects. And since it is far easier to degrade sound over long line level interconnections (especially unbalanced) than it is over appropriately sized (cross sectional area) speaker cable lengths, then the argument in favour (in my opinion) is weak.

True, you progressively lose high frequency amplitude as the length increases.

 

[Ropeburn]

What lengths are we talking about here? I'd say 10 meters already counts as quite long in a home context. While all the above comments are true in principle, how much does it really matter in practice? Live audio uses dozens of meters of microphone cable sometimes, for example. Symmetric or not only benefits interference pickup either, not frequency response of the whole source-cable-sink system.

 

[Sal1950]

At the expense of longer line level interconnects. And since it is far easier to degrade sound over long line level interconnections (especially unbalanced) than it is over appropriately sized (cross sectional area) speaker cable lengths, then the argument in favour (in my opinion) is weak.

Agreed, and as a rule quality line level interconnects are more expensive than speaker cable per foot.

 

[Ropeburn]

Agreed, and as a rule quality line level interconnects are more expensive than speaker cable per foot.

Really? 1-2 moneys per meter and you're set. Just get a 50m roll of Sommer/Cordial/etc 2x0.35mm² and never worry about line cable again. Speaker cable is more expensive by price of copper alone.

 

[Sal1950]

Really? 1-2 moneys per meter and you're set. Just get a 50m roll of Sommer/Cordial/etc 2x0.35mm² and never worry about line cable again. Speaker cable is more expensive by price of copper alone.

View attachment 517519

??? How many of our members are making and soldering up their own interconnects?
Blue Jean Cable LC 2 interconnects are $62 for one 1m pair, how many pair does your system require?

 

[Ropeburn]

??? How many of our members are making and soldering up their own interconnects?

I dunno. Make a poll? In any case: not enough of them.

Blue Jean Cable LC 2 interconnects are $62 for one 1m pair, how many pair does your system require?

I dunno. 6-7 pairs? Including fun toys like samplers and synthesizers. Around 100 euromoneys total, including lengthy ones so I can noodle around on the couch.

60 for a pair? My face:

400 for cables? Ludicrous. I'll buy half a nice stereo for that kinda money!