2. amps-preamps
  3. 1138151143

UcD vs TriPath Digital amps.


I have been enthusiastic about the CarverPro ZR1600 digital power amp which I have used for several years with Magnepan MG1.6 speakers. Actually I have three ZR1600, each driving a MG1.6 with one channel and a two-driver subwoofer with the other. The ZR1600 uses the Tripath digital control module.

I have just purchased three CI Audio D-200 amps, which use the UcD digital module. The TriPath module does its digital switching at a commanded variable frequency (“spread spectrum”). The modulation pattern is between 200 KHz and 1.5 MHz. The UcD module is self-oscillating (like the ICE module) at (I think) 44KHz.

Let me say at the onset that the ZR1600 is a very fine amplifier, and mates particularly well with the MG1.6. My reasons for replacing it are not primarily on account of its sonic character. I wanted an amp that I could attach directly to the rear of the speakers, thereby avoiding any issue with speaker cables. This is not practical with the ZR1600 because it has a cooling fan, and needs to be in a remote location, like the cellar. Also, as my subwoofer system has evolved its impedance has ended up at 2 ohms. While the ZR1600 is rated for 2 ohm operation, distortion with this load is increased, and I am worried about what happens to the other channel, which shares the power supply. My plan is to drive one subwoofer driver with each channel of a ZR1600, and use a CI Audio D-200 for the Maggie.

All three ZR1600, six channels of 600 watts at 4 ohms, cost me less than $2500. Three D-200, 325 watts each, cost me almost $3500. If cost is important I think that the ZR1600 wins.

Thus far I have simply inserted the D-200 amps in place of one channel of the ZR1600, in the cellar without changing speaker cables, but initial listening is encouraging. Playing a Mozart violin concerto, Pentatone SACD PTC 5186 064 (an excellent disc) the sound is really smooth, sweet, tube-like (?), without loss of the clarity that I liked in the ZR1600. I find that violin is most affected by any sharpness in the midrange. More extensive listening will be interesting, especially when I get around to relocation of the amps at the speakers without speaker wires.

The CI D-200 is well built. It has received enthusiastic reviews by the various gurus, and it seems that this is not hype.
eldartford
eldartford OP
4,262 posts
 
It's ciaudio.com
gordus
118 posts
 
Though I don't have the CIAudio D200's, I've been running some fairly highly modified UcD 400's for some time now and, for me, the MW 9se is a match made in heaven. I'm using the Tung Sol tubes, which I feel are just a smidgeon warmer than the stock Philips. Beautious...
ar_t
165 posts
 
I looked into using the Tripath stuff a few years back, and I was not crazy about it. I have reason to believe that they got the distortion down at the risk of playing games with the dead time. In a manner that might lead to shorted transistors.

The UcD has good performance, and low EMI. Their approach may end up being the best one, performance-wise. Although ICEpower will most likely outsell them, due to their deep pockets. Partnering with Sanyo will not hurt any, especially when every cheap receiver by J. A. Pan, Inc. will most likely use them pretty soon.
eldartford OP
4,262 posts
 
Ar_t...The CI D-200 sound better and better. I now have them located directly behind the Maggies with 3 foot (biwire) cables.

I have been running the three ZR1600 for a couple of years with no problems at all. One channel has had a 2 ohm load and the other 4 ohms (for each ZR1600). I even ran with shorted speaker cables on one occasion without incident other than protective shutdown.
eldartford OP
4,262 posts
 
CORRECTION...The UcD module is self-oscillating (like the ICE module) at 412 KHz (not 44KHz). When I wrote it I really couldn't believe that 44KHz would work.
More to discover