Why is the D400 "better" than the D200

[Antoine]

From the marketing texts of the D400: 

(I'm afraid something got lost here in translation e.g. 'Current return from the total mass')

Finally, a dual-mono solution at an affordable price! The Devialet 400 is the most comprehensive and high-performance dual-mono model. Extreme power (400 W), an inexhaustible wealth of adjustable parameters and unsurpassed performances (THD + N 0.00025%), the Devialet 400 finally enables you to make the transition to a  system comprised of two power blocks.

In this configuration, the Devialet 400 offers you unequalled musical resolution and beats every record. Devialet's technology is magnified through its operation in mono-block mode via a dedicated power supply and an ADH core for each channel.

• the power supply and balanced converter dedicated to each speaker offer you more power and greater dynamics, most notably by way of SAM technology
  
  
• the use of the Devialet 400 in mono-block mode enables the elimination of the current return from the total mass and the further improvement of the performance of the DAC "Magic Wire" and  analogue inputs (THD + N 0,00025%). The dual-mode also reduces signal jitter for all digital inputs.
  

I think it boils down to separated power supplies and ADH cores (less crosstalk/noise/ground contamination, more power per channel) and the use of 2 DAC IC's (I think the DACs run in parallel in order to sum the outputs and average the difference) vs. 1 per channel (less distortion and jitter).

[yabaVR]

From the marketing texts of the D400: 

(I'm afraid something got lost here in translation e.g. 'Current return from the total mass')

Finally, a dual-mono solution at an affordable price! The Devialet 400 is the most comprehensive and high-performance dual-mono model. Extreme power (400 W), an inexhaustible wealth of adjustable parameters and unsurpassed performances (THD + N 0.00025%), the Devialet 400 finally enables you to make the transition to a  system comprised of two power blocks.

In this configuration, the Devialet 400 offers you unequalled musical resolution and beats every record. Devialet's technology is magnified through its operation in mono-block mode via a dedicated power supply and an ADH core for each channel.

• the power supply and balanced converter dedicated to each speaker offer you more power and greater dynamics, most notably by way of SAM technology
  
  
• the use of the Devialet 400 in mono-block mode enables the elimination of the current return from the total mass and the further improvement of the performance of the DAC "Magic Wire" and  analogue inputs (THD + N 0,00025%). The dual-mode also reduces signal jitter for all digital inputs.
  

I think it boils down to separated power supplies and ADH cores (less crosstalk/noise/ground contamination, more power per channel) and the use of 2 DAC IC's (I think the DACs run in parallel in order to sum the outputs and average the difference) vs. 1 per channel (less distortion and jitter).

I get your point.
But how comes a D250 shows similar sound characteristic improvements (Compared to a D200 being a half D400) as a D400 without the concept of dual mono. Only by raising the voltage in the power supply as they say? Other than that their hardware is completely the same (you know I had both on my workbench). That's not conclusive to me thus some kind of processing might be envolved ?!

gui

[Antoine]

Hi Gui, your guess is as good as mine, it has puzzled me since the 170 was released.

[Confused]

From the marketing texts of the D400: 

(I'm afraid something got lost here in translation e.g. 'Current return from the total mass')

Finally, a dual-mono solution at an affordable price! The Devialet 400 is the most comprehensive and high-performance dual-mono model. Extreme power (400 W), an inexhaustible wealth of adjustable parameters and unsurpassed performances (THD + N 0.00025%), the Devialet 400 finally enables you to make the transition to a  system comprised of two power blocks.

In this configuration, the Devialet 400 offers you unequalled musical resolution and beats every record. Devialet's technology is magnified through its operation in mono-block mode via a dedicated power supply and an ADH core for each channel.

• the power supply and balanced converter dedicated to each speaker offer you more power and greater dynamics, most notably by way of SAM technology
  
  
• the use of the Devialet 400 in mono-block mode enables the elimination of the current return from the total mass and the further improvement of the performance of the DAC "Magic Wire" and  analogue inputs (THD + N 0,00025%). The dual-mode also reduces signal jitter for all digital inputs.
  

I think it boils down to separated power supplies and ADH cores (less crosstalk/noise/ground contamination, more power per channel) and the use of 2 DAC IC's (I think the DACs run in parallel in order to sum the outputs and average the difference) vs. 1 per channel (less distortion and jitter).

I get your point.
But how comes a D250 shows similar sound characteristic improvements (Compared to a D200 being a half D400) as a D400 without the concept of dual mono. Only by raising the voltage in the power supply as they say? Other than that their hardware is completely the same (you know I had both on my workbench). That's not conclusive to me thus some kind of processing might be envolved ?!

gui

I recall discussing this with Devialet's Mathieu Pernot, maybe about three years ago.  He stated that the hardware is indeed identical.  The difference is in the control of the power supply.  I cannot claim to fully understand this myself, or it's absolute significance in terms of sound quality, but the difference is in the control of the power supply, that is the 200's power supply does have some limitations imposed versus the D250, the reason being that if you did not, the 200 would overheat.  One thing I am clear about, Mathieu Pernot said absolutely nothing about any differences in processing, although could you consider some kind of electronic control over the power supply as 'processing'? I think this could certainly give that impression.

[yabaVR]

Hi Gui, your guess is as good as mine, it has puzzled me since the 170 was released.

Think of a D120 being economically profitable for the company and you achieve the sound of it by only downsizing the original technical concept by software to block its full capability.
That would give (and it does) Devialet an enormous economically profit on the bigger models. Gosh...they are all the same inside and the better cases of the 250/1000 cost a penny more on aluminum...ok, don't think about it, don't think about it, don't...

gui

[yabaVR]

From the marketing texts of the D400: 

(I'm afraid something got lost here in translation e.g. 'Current return from the total mass')



I think it boils down to separated power supplies and ADH cores (less crosstalk/noise/ground contamination, more power per channel) and the use of 2 DAC IC's (I think the DACs run in parallel in order to sum the outputs and average the difference) vs. 1 per channel (less distortion and jitter).

I get your point.
But how comes a D250 shows similar sound characteristic improvements (Compared to a D200 being a half D400) as a D400 without the concept of dual mono. Only by raising the voltage in the power supply as they say? Other than that their hardware is completely the same (you know I had both on my workbench). That's not conclusive to me thus some kind of processing might be envolved ?!

gui

I recall discussing this with Devialet's Mathieu Pernot, maybe about three years ago.  He stated that the hardware is indeed identical.  The difference is in the control of the power supply.  I cannot claim to fully understand this myself, or it's absolute significance in terms of sound quality, but the difference is in the control of the power supply, that is the 200's power supply does have some limitations imposed versus the D250, the reason being that if you did not, the 200 would overheat.  One thing I am clear about, Mathieu Pernot said absolutely nothing about any differences in processing, although could you consider some kind of electronic control over the power supply as 'processing'?  I think this could certainly give that impression.

Just think of it from Devialet's point of view. You have to keep a wide gap between a D200 and a D250 SQ-wise to justify the almost double price. So you only have the aluminum case and as I know they scaled down the Voltage in the powersupply due to less cooling mass of the case (they say). You can be sure that Mathieu Pernot would never come around with something like sound processing for the worse on smaller models. It would be a shame. They wouldn't do that. I think they do it in a VW-style. Alter the software and keep their mouths shut...(oops so should I   )

But as they build it, it's their game...and I love my D anyway   .

gui

[Confused]

Hi Gui, your guess is as good as mine, it has puzzled me since the 170 was released.

Think of a D120 being economically profitable for the company and you achieve the sound of it by only downsizing the original technical concept by software to block its full capability.
That would give (and it does) Devialet an enormous economically profit on the bigger models. Gosh...they are all the same inside and the better cases of the 250/1000 cost a penny more on aluminum...ok, don't think about it, don't think about it, don't...

gui

I was told that the D250/1000 cases (or more accurately the case per the original D-Premier) are actually very expensive to produce and account for a significant proportion of the cost of the units that have them.  So the original D170, as it was, offers a way of making the units far more affordable, albeit with some compromises from the original design.  It's worth remembering that the D-Premier came first, and even today is a very fine amplifier.

[Soniclife]

Hi Gui, your guess is as good as mine, it has puzzled me since the 170 was released.

Think of a D120 being economically profitable for the company and you achieve the sound of it by only downsizing the original technical concept by software to block its full capability.
That would give (and it does) Devialet an enormous economically profit on the bigger models. Gosh...they are all the same inside and the better cases of the 250/1000 cost a penny more on aluminum...ok, don't think about it, don't think about it, don't...

gui

I was told that the D250/1000 cases (or more accurately the case per the original D-Premier) are actually very expensive to produce and account for a significant proportion of the cost of the units that have them.  So the original D170, as it was, offers a way of making the units far more affordable, albeit with some compromises from the original design.  It's worth remembering that the D-Premier came first, and even today is a very fine amplifier.

And dosen't the 120 have less of something inside, something adh related?

[yabaVR]

And dosen't the 120 have less of something inside, something adh related?

No, they only lack on 2 RCA inputs and the AES/EBU input. That's 5,23€ for the Neutrik-XLR and...you get it.

The cost of a circuit platine is negligible nowadays. Therefor the motherboard/platines are the same in all Devialets. It's only software configuration that's different. It's a clever concept. Once layed down it's simple to adjust.

gui

[thumb5]

And dosen't the 120 have less of something inside, something adh related?

No, they only lack on 2 RCA inputs and the AES/EBU input. That's 5,23€ for the Neutrik-XLR and...you get it.

The cost of a circuit platine is negligible nowadays. Therefor the motherboard/platines are the same in all Devialets. It's only software configuration that's different. It's a clever concept. Once layed down it's simple to adjust.

gui

Going from memory from when I bought my 170...I'm pretty sure Soniclife is correct: the 120 (110 as it was then) has a lower-power D-amplifier with fewer inductors/transformers than the 200 and 250. I recall it also has a different ADC for the analog front-ends. Maybe I'm wrong or that has changed over time, though.