Nic Robinson
Moderator
I want! Can I trade in my NCC200s, Les?
Thanks Malcolm.
Another question re drop in replacement suitability - are these new boards still happy with the vbe front end supply as used in voyager/clones?
(Snipped) ..... you lose a 1N4148 and 100R resistor from the output stage and TR10 changes from an MJ15003 to an MJ15004.
I have no idea what you gents are talking about. It's a bit like the Japanese poetry we were taught at school- inherently beautiful but way beyond my faculties of understanding. I am embarrassed to ask such a trog question amidst such elevated discussion but are/will these boards be 'fittable' to a NAP180?
I have no idea what you gents are talking about. It's a bit like the Japanese poetry we were taught at school- inherently beautiful but way beyond my faculties of understanding. I am embarrassed to ask such a trog question amidst such elevated discussion but are/will these boards be 'fittable' to a NAP180?
Les, will this new board be part of your Nap135 upgrade?
Could be but we'll see how it pans out
That is what Les has written on the Avondale web site and I believe that design is in the final stages.I thought this board is a replacement for the NCC200 and the replacement for the NAP135 boards is the NCC300.
Matt
I thought this board is a replacement for the NCC200 and the replacement for the NAP135 boards is the NCC300.
Matt
Anecdotally, when I had a 135 4-pack hooked up to my Epos ES30s, I found the best result for me was a pair of 135s for the tweeters, and the other pair for the mids and woofers. I tried both ways round, dedicated woofer amp vs dedicated tweeter amp, and preferred the latter.Personally my 135's only drive the mid and tweeters in my Yammies with the bass handled actively by another amp (with much more power), so the Qudos may be the way to go - let's see how Les' thoughts pan out.
Using a simple duo of 135s, the NCC300s appear to hold the key to current delivery
so this will be the staple diet for passively driven Briks etc.