Nord Three SE 1ET400A Dual Mono Stereo Amp Review

[Audiocrusader]

And you could parallel a dozen SMPS 1200AS400's up to the 1ET400A's and it still won't change the current limit trigger at 25A. If you're among the ignorant, one may think the supply is shutting down. But when the FATAL line on the module triggers due to thermal or current limiters triggering in the amp modules, the supplies shut down.

The moral of the story is the protections in the amp modules will trigger long before a single SMPS1200A400 will run out of steam powering dual 1ET400A modules.

 

[hapnermw]

Yes with this Nord amp, the inlet fuse blew before the current limiter in the amp modules, not the power supply, could trigger.

If we were to talk about the continuous output of the Purifi modules into 4 ohms using the same 325W continuous rating Hypex uses for the SMPS1200, the Purifi modules put out around 100w a piece. So combined we have 200w continuous. A long ways below the 325w continuous rating of the SMPS1200. So yes since we are talking about the Purifi 1ET400A modules which output around 100w continuous into 4 ohms, people certainly won't be running them at 160w continuous. So you have that part correct.

The Purifi 1ET400A module spec does not list a continuous or RMS power rating. It simply states its power rating as 425 watts at 1% distortion into 4 ohms. Both amp reviews show it delivers 250+ watts into 4 ohms (likely at 1KHz) at the distortion knee. This is likely a conservative continuous power rating for the module.

What module specification have you found that lists a 100 watt continuous power rating?

 

[bravomail]

Schurter are my favourite (ALL my DC Blockers used them, only the Schurter IEC C14 power inlet with two little fuses) and connectors to. I LOVE the Schurter IEC C13 connector too. But with RF/EMI mains input filters only I trust in Schaffner.

This is what audiophilia came to. To branding switches. Pls discuss the musicality of different brands of switches! Pls do!

 

[Audiocrusader]

The Purifi 1ET400A module spec does not list a continuous or RMS power rating. It simply states its power rating as 425 watts at 1% distortion into 4 ohms. Both amp reviews show it delivers 250+ watts into 4 ohms (likely at 1KHz) at the distortion knee. This is likely a conservative continuous power rating for the module.

What module specification have you found that lists a 100 watt continuous power rating?

Yes Purifi chose to say the continuous output is based on the thermal limitations of the heatsink. However the NC-500, that was designed by the same man, is rated at 700w into 4 ohms @ 1% THD. So much more powerful than the 450W @ 1% THD of the Purifi module. And Hypex rated it at 100w continuous, based on the Hypex in house continuous rating standard (also shared with the SMPS1200A400)

 

[Labjr]

Fighting marketing bull is a noble cause, but I am wondering if you have chosen the right target. Purifi and Hypex are not OEM, they supply to OEMs. Why don't you shoot at AKM, ESS, TI,... because no DAC ever measured here has reached the components specification? BTW, ever looked at a product brief from ESS?
In example, we both know very well that amplifier power is deeply linked to the power supply. Purifi says 450W at 65V. The Nord and reference modules use an SMPS1200A400 which is rated typical 63VDC at 230VAC. Delivered power is lower than component spec. Not really a surprise.

IMO, DAC chips are different than modules.

 

[Audiocrusader]

IMO, DAC chips are different than modules.

Not really in this case. DAC chip manufacturers provide a product that's absolutely useless without combining it with multiple sub-components to build a final product out of. And the final performance is limited by the other sub-components and implementation. No different here. Purifi only provides an output module. Which is useless on it's own. to make a product from it, multiple 3rd part power supplies are required. And input buffer stage, and I/O board is required. And the just like a DAC chip the final performance is limited by the other sub-components and implementation.

The ESS9038 Pro is rated at at SINAD of 140dB. Do we hear people crying when a finished DAC can't compete?

 

[Matias]

Oh I may have been a bit high on my continuous power rating of the Purifi modules based on Hypex's standard for continuous. Which they share the exact standard for when rating their supplies. We can see here with their NC-500 modules which are rated for 700WPC into 4 ohms @ 1% THD, they rate them at 100W continuous.View attachment 39271

Long term continuous power is only a lab test. Music content has peaks.

 

[boXem]

IMO, DAC chips are different than modules.

Why? Both are to be integrated in a final product.

 

[Audiocrusader]

Long term continuous power is only a lab test. Music content has peaks.

Yes of course and the peak power rating of a single SMPS1200A400 is 1500w. Far above and beyond the highest peaks of dual 1ET400A modules.

 

[Labjr]

Why? Both are to be integrated in a final product.

A DAC chip is one component. Purifi are complete modules. Whoop-tee-doo, they changed the buffer?

The modules are likely tested together with Hypex SMPS modules. Remember Bruno designed them too? If Purifi currently made their own SMPS modules, amp assemblers would be using them.

IMO, Nord doesn't design complete products.

 

[boXem]

A DAC chip is one component. Purifi are complete modules. Whoop-tee-doo, they changed the buffer?

The modules are likely tested together with Hypex SMPS modules. Remember Bruno designed them too? If Purifi currently made their own SMPS modules, amp assemblers would be using them.

IMO, Nord doesn't design complete products.

I will make abstraction from the condescending tone.

Complete modules are in example the Hypex NCxxxMP. You just put them in a box and you have an amp.

Purifi provides a subsystem, without input buffer, without any power supply.

What do you need to get a DAC chip working? A power supply and an output buffer.

Where is the difference?

 

[amirm]

What do you need to get a DAC chip working? A power supply and an output buffer.

Where is the difference?

Big difference. Layout and output buffer designs in DACs are much more complicated than using an amplifier subsystem. You can see wide variation between DACs that use the same DAC chip for example.

 

[boXem]

Big difference. Layout and output buffer designs in DACs are much more complicated than using an amplifier subsystem. You can see wide variation between DACs that use the same DAC chip for example.

Right, but that's not my point.
My point is that the 1ET400A is a subsystem, and it's performance is linked to the way it is integrated in the final system.

 

[amirm]

Purifi provides the input module as well, making the whole thing an assembly exercise. You don't need to know anything about electronics and design to build an amp with it. Not so at all with a DAC chip.

 

[boXem]

As far as I know, Purifi doesn't provide the input module to assemblers.
I don't even understand what's wrong with what I am writing... I just pointed that a module spec should not be taken as final product spec. Nothing more.

 

[restorer-john]

You don't need to know anything about electronics and design to build an amp

Shhh!! Don't tell Cianus Audio.

 

[Labjr]

Purifi provides the input module as well, making the whole thing an assembly exercise. You don't need to know anything about electronics and design to build an amp with it. Not so at all with a DAC chip.

Amen!

 

[Labjr]

As far as I know, Purifi doesn't provide the input module to assemblers.
I don't even understand what's wrong with what I am writing... I just pointed that a module spec should not be taken as final product spec. Nothing more.

You're debating semantics. Bruno designed the Hypex power supply modules? Are you not aware of that?

 

[boXem]

You're debating semantics. Bruno designed the Hypex power modules? Are you no aware of that?

In front of such a brilliant argument, I have to admit that I lost the debate. Congrats, you're the winner!

 

[hapnermw]

Yes Purifi chose to say the continuous output is based on the thermal limitations of the heatsink. However the NC-500, that was designed by the same man, is rated at 700w into 4 ohms @ 1% THD. So much more powerful than the 450W @ 1% THD of the Purifi module. And Hypex rated it at 100w continuous, based on the Hypex in house continuous rating standard (also shared with the SMPS1200A400)

It is clear that use of a single SMPS 1200 in a Purifi-based stereo amp will likely work well. On the other hand, it is also clear that using an SMPS 1200 per Purifi module is not a completely stupid design decision. It seems the negatives and positives of this choice are within the realm of debate - the specifications leave enough room to justify either one.

Possibly someone will ask Bruno his thoughts on this.

In some ways, using one SMPS 1200 could be seen as equivalent to using dual SMPS 600's. If someone has decided on a dual mono amp, the difference in price/efficiency/quality between dual 1200's and 600's makes dual 1200's an easy choice.