Avondale SE200 Announcement on FB

[S-Man]

Try wrapping it in thick neoprene foam.

This might cause it to get too hot

 

[jpk]

[EDIT not mechanical but earth related]: I had a similar hum problem with a dual mono amp: it appeared with one source but not with another source. In my case it was because speaker protection boards joined speaker-GND of the two channels, and this formed some kind of earth loop with that source (and the preamp joined R and L GNDs as well).

(Plus in my case the R and L transformers tried to level out their 0V potential against each other and this seemed to create some kind of bounce through the earth loop)

 

[laverda]

What's strange to me is (as stated before, sorry) I have this 500va twin secondary EI which Ive been using for years (IMG) which is 'totally' silent on the bench (apart from power up which is a satisfying thrummmmmm as the winding fill up) and in use in the amp, Its quite a bit larger than the XTC EIs its sat on. I have not idea who made it.

So why does the ETC EI suffer the mechanical hum/buzz issue. Im at least 3 mts away from the amp and the hum is 'just' audible without music playing, playing music I cant hear it.

The gains for me are, greater transparency, greater detail retrieval and a deeper wider sound stage compared to my toroidal TX variant.

 

[OzBrit Audio]

Details, man, details! You can't just throw that in!

FET regs each driven with their own supply power supply. So the Tiger has 4 outs 2 providing 2 x 52V using 35A bridge single 22000uf and 2 x 55V single 10000uf for the front end. So not an 'optimised' power supply using Schottky or multiple capacitor banks and also long wire leads. All on a test chassis I use for testing my amplifier builds so the power supply has room for improvement.

I have tried TIP41/42 based regs and also FET based regs and the FET wins. Sorry I can't provide more detail as they as the designs are Avondale used in the NCC300 and 400 Avondale boards.

Using the front end FET regs the sound quality borders on stunning. Also the same with the TIP based regs but better with the FET. A definite step up from the existing very good sound of the standard SE200. Improvements to be heard are across the board but most noticeable in the area of cohesion on complex passages, micro detail is not masked out so much, bass drive and texture is better. You get the picture.

Please note these are my experiences in my environment. One of the issues I have here is dirty mains, it is a constant bugbear particulaty for my digital front end. More recently I have come too realise that this also might be having an affect on my power amplification as well. So peoples experiences of regulating the front end these boards will probably differ but one I thing I can confidently say is there should be a lift in SQ.

 

[OzBrit Audio]

I must admit I was tempted by the ETC transformers until I got the low down on this thread. Sounds like they are not constructed correctly to me - they shouldn't buzz like they do and as I do of lot of late night listening I couldn't put up with it. I remember my first amplifier build (going back to the late 1970's - hells bells what happened to all those years ) I had a 150VA transformer and it was quiet as a button as I remember. In fact I still have it I think so I may arrange to get it shipped over from the UK.

I don't doubt the SQ improvement with the EI though. Thats 4 people so far who have commented. For me I want to try a different tack. I want to try a good switched power supply (properly designed). What I like about switched supplies is they rebuild the AC so any crap (particularly crap that can't be filtered out) doesn't make it to the DC. Plus they are regulated so don't suffer the problems of voltage swing under load.

I know Mike did some testing with some cheapo Meanwell supplies a while back and was impressed with the imaging they produced. The problem was with the transients and attack - they couldn't respond to power delivery which was their downfall I think. But properly designed I feel they can provide the SQ benefits of an EI transformer with the transient delivery of the conventional transformer - capacitor bank solution.

More manufacturers are moving towards switched supplies particularly those who have gone down the Class D route. Chord for example produces some superb sounding power amplifiers, they use Class AB but the power supplies are all switched.

The problem is finding a really good switched supply to use with DIY builds. Hypex do some but I think they still have limitations on their transient delivery (from what I have heard). There is a company in Western Australia, March Audio, that does very good Purify builds (in fact run by a Brit) and I know he designed his own switched power supply because he wasn't happy with the Hypex module.

I am temped to see if he will sell me one to try with my Avondale builds. If this comes to anything I will let you all know.

 

[Mike Hanson]

I know Mike did some testing with some cheapo Meanwell supplies a while back and was impressed with the imaging they produced. The problem was with the transients and attack - they couldn't respond to power delivery which was their downfall I think. But properly designed I feel they can provide the SQ benefits of an EI transformer with the transient delivery of the conventional transformer - capacitor bank solution.

Confirmed. I'm still running a stacked MeanWell supply with a pair of NCC200s in my bedroom. That amp is very fast and detailed, but is never expected to "slam" (which is good, because it can't).

At some point I should try those MeanWell supplies on the input stage of the amps, and use a regular LPS with rectifier+caps on the output stage. I'm not sure how the zero reference would work in that case, though. I'll have to ponder it more before trying it.

 

[OzBrit Audio]

Did you ever try adding some capacitor banks to the Meanwell. Say 10000uf per side. They may cause the power supplies current limiting to come into play but worth a try I think?

 

[laverda]

Did you ever try adding some capacitor banks to the Meanwell. Say 10000uf per side. They may cause the power supplies current limiting to come into play but worth a try I think?

Some years ago a builder (may be more than just one) over on DIYaudio did add some uF between a Meanwell SMPS and the ACAmp project with very good results, there was a bit more than just a pair of caps as I remember, a sort of soft start I think.

 

[Mike Hanson]

Did you ever try adding some capacitor banks to the Meanwell. Say 10000uf per side. They may cause the power supplies current limiting to come into play but worth a try I think?

It was discussed back when I was experimenting with it, and someone smarter than I was suggested that it would not be a good idea to put a bank of capacitors after those supplies. Perhaps it would be fine though.

 

[Golfinho]

With the hope of (more) updated information on the SE series...
Any feedback from the listening tests?
I'm especially interested in the comparison of the SE200 series with and without the HCR200 (dual mono/single) and the SE230 series (dual mono/single) vs Qudos+HCR200.

I currently have a Qudos+HCR200 dual mono amplifier, and I'm thinking about the SE200 upgrade, but...
Keep thinking about the SE230!
I don't have the possibility of sending the two amplifiers to the UK for updating (now costs too high in the EU!) but I could consider buying a simple SE230 stereo from Les.

Thanks for your comments...

 

[Mike Hanson]

I've got a simple dual mono SE200 running here, which runs circles around my Voyager mono QUDOS amps (using VBE, not HCR200).

BTW, my dual mono NCC300 also surpassed the Voyager mono QUDOS as well, and the Voyager mono NCC300s were even better. (The dual mono SE200 beats both these NCC300 builds.)

I just pulled the NCC220 boards about of those mono Voyagers to sell to a fellow fishie, and I'm going to be replacing them with the SE200 boards, which should raise the bar nicely.

 

[OzBrit Audio]

I would just buy a pair of the SE200's. They are a really good amplifier, I've been running them on and off for about a year now using early pre production boards which I built up myself and have gone through several iterations of component changes. The latest build which pretty much mirrors Les's production boards do sound very good indeed. Compared with Qudos (which I also have) the SE200 is like the older brother, same family but much more grown up. In sonic terms you will notice an immediate uplift in sound quality. Vocals stand out more, the sound stage is much better defined and with an improved sense of depth over what the Qudos can deliver. Overall presentation is on the warm side in a similar way to a good valve amp but with the rhythmic drive you'd expect from good solid state. There is much to like with the SE200.

I say get the 200 over the 230 as the boards are available DIY @ £750 and will offer a big jump over what you already have. My implementation is a dual mono, single transformer with minicap6's. You also have dual mono but with regulated power supplies which I expect would give a further lift in SQ.

Run with the 200's is my vote

 

[James Evans]

I think given that the SE230 is not being sold for DIY fitting, so you would have to send the amps to Les to fit the boards, that probably makes your decision for you. The SE200 amp I built here pretty much mirrors what OzBrit says above, and was an immediately obvious uplift on the Qudos amp I have.

 

[Mosquito]

I think given that the SE230 is not being sold for DIY fitting, so you would have to send the amps to Les to fit the boards, that probably makes your decision for you. The SE200 amp I built here pretty much mirrors what OzBrit says above, and was an immediately obvious uplift on the Qudos amp I have.

I was lucky in that I spoke to Les just before Christmas about the SE230 boards and he offered me a deal. I could have the SE200 boards to fit myself or for not much more I could have the SE230's fitted by the man himself / Gavin. I took the latter and I am well chuffed with the results. Much more grown up than the Naim 135 clones which I had . Cost of UPS to send and return the pair of amps to Les was only about £50

 

[GordonM]

Another vote for the SE200. Since installing them in my NAP140 15 months ago every listening session is a wow moment (not exaggerating).
Never known any upgrade to make such a significant, long term improvement. They're just wonderfully musical.

 

[laverda]

The SE200 and the SE230 do not require any form of regulation IMO. I have found that if you regulate the 'output' stages it tends to sit on the SQ a little.

The SE200's are fantastic and I cant think of a better amp other than the next in line, the SE230. I know the SE230 is not a DIY install but my word it's worth the extra cost. £1000 a pair + a small fee for fitting and setup (I believe) is a cheap price to pay for the resultant SQ.

The SE230 has everything the SE200's have but presents you with a wider, deeper sound stage, they let you hear things from deep within the recording that was previously unheard. They also have that illusive quality 'finesse' adding texture and feeling that only the very highest quality products can achieve.

 

[Golfinho]

More information and confirmation you were looking for!
SE230 is better than all other configurations (Dual mono, +HCR200 or Voyager).
I'm thinking of a simpler configuration, like, post by Richard #72.
I'll write to Les to see what conditions it would take to build, I hope.

 

[L_Santos]

Hello. Has anyone tried an SE200 (Mono) or SE230 (Mono) in Voyager mode with VBE?
Will the SE200 (Mono) in Voyager mode with VBE come close to the SE230?
Thanks.

 

[OzBrit Audio]

Mike has plans to try his SE200 with VBE so he will be able to give feedback on that configuration.

I gave tried both the the SE200 and SE230 boards on a test rig with a regulated front end (not VBE, actually the regulators on partially built NCC300 boards, no amplifier components) and felt there was a lift in SQ by doing so. Problem was my main amplifier is dual mono, twin secondaries on a Canterbury windings with minicap6s so difficult to do proper comparisons. My test rig has an inferior PSU, tiger toroid four secondaries, single 22000uf caps for the back end and single 10000uf caps for the the front end. Rectifiers were standard 35A bridge across the board. So seperate supplies for each side and front and back but not as good as on my main amp. Wiring on my test rig was also quite long compared with nice and short on my main box.

Having said all that I did think the 230's did sound particularly good with regulated front ends.

 

[L_Santos]

Mike has plans to try his SE200 with VBE so he will be able to give feedback on that configuration.

I gave tried both the the SE200 and SE230 boards on a test rig with a regulated front end (not VBE, actually the regulators on partially built NCC300 boards, no amplifier components) and felt there was a lift in SQ by doing so. Problem was my main amplifier is dual mono, twin secondaries on a Canterbury windings with minicap6s so difficult to do proper comparisons. My test rig has an inferior PSU, tiger toroid four secondaries, single 22000uf caps for the back end and single 10000uf caps for the the front end. Rectifiers were standard 35A bridge across the board. So seperate supplies for each side and front and back but not as good as on my main amp. Wiring on my test rig was also quite long compared with nice and short on my main box.

Having said all that I did think the 230's did sound particularly good with regulated front ends.

Hello, thanks for the answer, we'll wait for the test. I think it will improve. Compliments.