Nevertheless, it would be somewhat wasted in use as a midrange driver only. There are smaller and/or cheaper drivers on the market with similar midrange nonlinear distortion performance, and which offer other advantages to manufacturers (lower cost, closer C2C spacing, better off-axis performance at higher frequencies, etc).
I really have trouble seeing the 6.5" Purifi earning its keep in any configuration other than a passive-radiator two-way (or perhaps a sealed two-way if the design is an active one); in that particular context, though, it obviously excels.
In an active system T/S-parameters are mostly irrelevant (and Qes can be arbitrarily changed), so the drivers will work in any alignment, be it CB, PR, BR, TML, Dipole, ...I really have trouble seeing the 6.5" Purifi earning its keep in any configuration other than a passive-radiator two-way (or perhaps a sealed two-way if the design is an active one); in that particular context, though, it obviously excels.
Somewhere I read, the 1ET400A amplifier is an evolution of the designs made by Bruno Putzeys before Purifi, but the Purifi transducers are a revolution in transducer design.
And I think that is correct, the search for imperfections in the design of a transducer and the solutions to solve these imperfections are astonishing.
Pavel, @Bruno Putzeys is a member here, so he might take any questions directly. And he (as the whole Purifi team) is a hell of an engineer, their data and specs are reliable and correct, I have no doubts about that.
That isn't what he said. The post you quoted was referring to the Purifi speaker drivers, not amplifier.So in fact, is it really a great leap forward compared to NC400?
A game changer? I was for me. I have VTV's version of the Purifi with VTV's own buffer and a Sparkos SS3602.
If I could talk about sound differences without incurring ridicule, I would say that the Purifi is significantly superior to my previous Hypex NC252MP in transparency, resolutions, and dynamics. But I suppose that is just my imagination, right?
The OP was about the Purifi transducers (speaker drivers) not their amplifiers. The evaluations of the two relative to any predecessors aren't related.
Just to avoid this thread derailing into the amp discussion.
Didn't Bruno P go through the difficulties of a true digital amp in an interview to do with Purifi? I think the conclusion was that it was not worth the effort. Lyngdorf is still persisting AFAIK, although no GaN FET based ones yet. Sounds like one of these ideas that is conceptually superb but other topologies are still more practical.It's an experimental amp. I'd wait for a rev 2 module. The way I see it, a truly digital class-D should be the real game changer. I mean a power-DAC where you input a PCM signal, which is upscaled to 24bits 768kHz and then converter into PWM in digital domain. using GaN FETs you could reach a 768kHz switching frequency on a full-bridge topology, and eliminate the need for both closed loop feedback and output filter...
You'll always need a feedback loop, otherwise you will have:It's an experimental amp. I'd wait for a rev 2 module. The way I see it, a truly digital class-D should be the real game changer. I mean a power-DAC where you input a PCM signal, which is upscaled to 24bits 768kHz and then converter into PWM in digital domain. using GaN FETs you could reach a 768kHz switching frequency on a full-bridge topology, and eliminate the need for both closed loop feedback and output filter...