Soundinista
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2007
- Posts
- 316
- Likes
- 16
Quote:
Yes, Bradman, I think that's the best that can be said on HeadRoom's behalf. But I'm afraid it won't hold water. Three problems:
1. There is no mention of the word "Astrodyne" in the Ultra pages. The crucial word there is "wall-wart". And I don't think it's any slip on their part, since they are pushing the Astrodyne brick as a "recommended accessory" for the regular Micro amp. They're not taking the difference between the wall-wart and the Astrodyne lightly.
2. At the non-technical level, things still don't add up. Notice: if the wall-warts are these brutes that HR would have us believe they are when compared to the presumably more refined DPS, where's the DPS option in the Ultra pages? Again, I can't believe they have forgotten to warn the prospective Ultra customer that there is more SQ to be had from their top-of-the-line electronics/DAC. (The Ultras have been priced to match the Max+Max Desktop.)
3. When the Astrodyne is factored in as a replacement for the DPS, Cecala's post #45 above assures us that the brick is powerful enough for the job. Moreover, on the refinement front, there's Max Dudio's hesitation (quoted by Cecala) to recommend the DPS over the "more dynamic" Astrodyne. (For chrissakes, are we paying $300 more to get less dynamic?!
)
So, we're still owed an explanation.
| Originally Posted by bradman /img/forum/go_quote.gif I believe I have this right, but jump in and correct me if I've got it arse about. The Ultras, both the amp and the dac, use one Astrodyne power supply each. Each unit has its own Astrodyne all to itself and the astrodyne is perfectly capable of providing sufficient juice for a single module. If you want to, you can purchase the dps and run both the Ultra amp and Ultra dac off that, dispensing with the Astrodynes altogether. I expect the HR folks would tell you that the dps would give an sq improvement over the two Astrodynes in this situation. The Desktop amp, on the other hand, can only be plugged into a single power supply, so if the Astrodyne can't cut the mustard, you have to get the dps. |
Yes, Bradman, I think that's the best that can be said on HeadRoom's behalf. But I'm afraid it won't hold water. Three problems:
1. There is no mention of the word "Astrodyne" in the Ultra pages. The crucial word there is "wall-wart". And I don't think it's any slip on their part, since they are pushing the Astrodyne brick as a "recommended accessory" for the regular Micro amp. They're not taking the difference between the wall-wart and the Astrodyne lightly.
2. At the non-technical level, things still don't add up. Notice: if the wall-warts are these brutes that HR would have us believe they are when compared to the presumably more refined DPS, where's the DPS option in the Ultra pages? Again, I can't believe they have forgotten to warn the prospective Ultra customer that there is more SQ to be had from their top-of-the-line electronics/DAC. (The Ultras have been priced to match the Max+Max Desktop.)
3. When the Astrodyne is factored in as a replacement for the DPS, Cecala's post #45 above assures us that the brick is powerful enough for the job. Moreover, on the refinement front, there's Max Dudio's hesitation (quoted by Cecala) to recommend the DPS over the "more dynamic" Astrodyne. (For chrissakes, are we paying $300 more to get less dynamic?!
So, we're still owed an explanation.
) short if you don't pair the amp with the dps. I just thought that summarising what we definitely know to be true at the moment would be worthwhile. From what I've been reading on head-fi, etc., an audiophile grade power supply basically consists of what you describe, i.e. a transformer followed by some kind of rectifier circuit and smoothing caps, etc. The thing that differentiates this from a regular power supply is the quality of components and attention to design and extra effort to produce as clean and constant an output as possible. The Astrodyne power supply is, to the best of my knowledge, a switched-mode power supply, which are much smaller and lighter because they don't have transformers in them. They work rather like a d-class amplifier, switching fully on and fully off and being pulse-width modulated in order to produce an output whose average voltage and amperage match the desired specifications. This output must obviously be filtered to smooth it out. Up until fairly recently, switched-mode power supplies have been fairly crude affairs and have been responsible for producing a lot of interference on the mains supply which can affect other equipment sharing the same line. They have generally been considered unsuitable for audio applications. However, many of the issues that have plagued switched-mode supplies seem to have been overcome in recent years and there use in audio applications is becoming more common. Nevertheless, it seems that most audiophiles still consider traditional transformer-based power supplies to be superior to switched-mode ones. My point in mentioning this is that the difference between the two supplies isn't just a matter of different caps. They are two totally different designs. If you already new this, i apologise for restating the obvious. Switched-mode power supplies are nowadays cheaper to manufacture (given the price of copper) than the traditional transformer kind and they are a lot smaller and lighter, which makes for cheaper shipping costs.