So I get the obvious strengths of Class D. Efficiency, power output & running cool which allows for small form factors. I also understand the weaknesses somewhat. 1. Non-linear & lots of distortion that needs to be cleaned up with an output filter. So my question is, if it weren't for efficiency & power, would there be any reason to own a Class D amp? Do they beat Class A in any other categories that count for sound quality?
But they still had a stripping of the harmonic structure of the upper/midrange and highs, leaving what seemed to be just the fundamental with no decay and an opaque sound with larger than usual "nothing" gaps in the music.
This is the perfect description of my experience with Ice Power. I have heard others describe this sound as neutral and uncolored, but to me the vocals and instruments sounded stripped. Diana Krall sounded more like Katy Perry. The larger than usual nothing gaps in the music made me focus on the recording instead of enjoying the song.
It seems like some companies are aware of this and add tube input stages to try and add harmonics and meat back to the bone.
I can understand this. I once owned a Honda Accord that started making this sound that can only be described as sounding like the car was passing wind. Every time you stepped on the accelerator, that first second of acceleration, it sounded and felt like the car had eaten too many burritos. Sounds crazy, but it felt and sounded awful, like sitting on a whoopie cushion. Took it back to two different dealers, both said it was normal. Dumped that thing, bought a Camry, and have never visited a Honda dealer since. Logically, I KNOW that Honda makes great cars, I like how they look, but I just can't go back...
Quite some years ago, I purchased a pair of Bel Canto REF-1000.
It ended up being my absolute worst purchase in my 30+ years in this hobby.
I understand of course that those class "D" designs have much improved since.
Still, I could not bring myself even today to even remotely give D another shot.
seanheis1 OP
Does anybody know what causes the dead silences in songs that is a characteristic of Class D? Is it the output filter or dead time? I really noticed this with my Ice Module and couldn’t figure out if the amp wasn’t allowing for the music to decay or if it was something else causing the inky blackness.
The BC 600 monoblocks we listened to were better than the Ref-1000’s when we a/b them, probably because of the 600’s multiple series up output filters. But they still had a stripping of the harmonic structure of the upper/midrange and highs, leaving what seemed to be just the fundamental with no decay and an opaque sound with larger than usual "nothing" gaps in the music.
Like I said before the switching frequency needs to be several times higher so then these output filters can do their job properly well away from the audio band without their side effects coming down into the audio band. A bit like those nasty "brick wall filters" used to do in the early days of CD Cheers George
Adding some more info about the Bel Canto REF1000 Mk.2. John Stronczer of Bel Canto added a custom input stage which elevated the input impedance from 8K Ohms to 100K Ohms, to make the amp compatible with those tubed pres that exhibit high output impedance.... As a side benefit, the amp also became much sweeter, immune from audible intermodulation in the treble, and... Quieter to boot.
seanheis1, while most newer class D amps are incredibly quiet, -- as in having no background noise -- foreshortened decay or "ead and opaque leadden silence around the note is not the sign of any good amp, unless a track was created synthetically and not from a live recording, in which case, no amp can ;be imputed with wrong doing.
Rather, a good amp, and so much so a good class D amp, is expected to give you what is sometimes called the "sound of the living Silence", that is the natural decay of notes, and the unavoidable ambient cues characteristic of all venues, except for anecoic chambers.
Actually, it’s more like frosting a cake that someone else baked.
When I owned the Atsah’s (same Hypex Ncore modules as the Veritas, also in milled aluminum boxes) I had the opportunity to try different wiring harnesses between boards and from the boards to the binding posts. I tried high quality wire from Harmonic Technology (individually insulated multiple strands of OCC copper), Jupiter (high quality copper in cotton) and others and the differences between changing about 5 inches of wire did not even approach the difference between chocolate and vanilla frosting on the cake. I agree Cardas wire is good (I have Lundahl transformers using Cardas wire that sound very good) but I doubt it changes the basic signature of the amplifiers, and certainly no more than changing speaker cables.
One thing Merrill does that I like is they apparently (not confirmed because I know of no posted pictures of the insides of Merrill’s amps) solder the wire directly to the boards rather than use the generic plastic connectors intended for the Hypex boards. However, I would have an issue owning a component where the manufacturer is so concerned with people looking at how it is constructed that they would not allow the end-user/owner to even open the box to change the fuse.
seanhesist I wouldn't call Merrill amps clones. It’s like baking a cake, taking ingredients and doing your
own implementation to get the taste/sound you want. I know Merrill also uses high end
fuses and yes I’ve heard them and they are super sounding amps. I could not
detect any faults but will say it was mated to a tube pre-amp which can make or
break the sound of some class D amps IMO. I'm now a believer.
It looks like Merrill is taking Hypex modules, putting them in beautiful cases with Cardas wiring, Cardas connectors, custom house brand power cable, & stillpoint feet...and putting a seal on the bottom of the case saying the warranty is void if the case is opened. Then their Veritas & Thor amps get reviewed and the reviewers claim that the sound is as good as amps costing 2-3 times as much. I don't doubt that Hypex is state of the art, but these appear to be clone amplifiers.
Lots of good discussion here. Going back to OP, I would simply answer that there are few really good reasons to own any amp other than sound.
Like others, I've owned and / or auditioned solid state, single ended, push-pull, OTL, Class A & A/B. Some behemoths, some hibachis. If the sound was good, I never spent much time thinking about efficiency, heat, form factor, etc.
I had a chance to audition Merrill Thor and Veritas and the sound convinced me. Both were better than anything I've heard before. I bought the Veritas and could not be happier, but the performance to price point on the Thor is simply incredible. Yeah, it's nice that the Class D amps are small, cool, efficient,etc, but in my experience there was no trade off in sonics - only improvement.
I think it's more likely that taste may vary (YTMV) and that's OK. But if you value open, relaxed, quiet, highly dynamic with expansive soundstage, there is no reason IMO not to investigate Class D amplification.
It’s just dead quiet ie very low noise floor seemingly. Not sure why or how. Its a characteristic of both my BEl Canto Class D amps, but is especially noticeable with the all digital C5i integrated (no tubes upstream).
Does anybody know what causes the dead silences in songs that is a characteristic of Class D? Is it the output filter or dead time? I really noticed this with my Ice Module and couldn’t figure out if the amp wasn’t allowing for the music to decay or if it was something else causing the inky blackness.
Mapman, I looked into Class D as I can no longer deal with heavy amps. (back issues) My all in one Lyngdorf weights about 20 pounds. I still have one tube amp that I use on occasion with the Lyngdorf. When my tube amp is being used I use the pre, dac and room correction portion of my Lyngdorf as the front end. I can compare the Lyngdorf amplification to my tube amp. The Lyngdorf is better overall and does not impart a particular sound that I would define as SS, PP tube, or SET tube. It just sounds right.
I just enjoy working on point to point wired tube gear and like the look and feel of tube gear. My love for tube gear is probably more emotional and tactile than sonically based. At least this is now true based on the wonderful sound quality of the Lyngdorf.
The neat thing is the Lyngdorf's room correction passes the ideal signal through my tube amp making it perform better than it would normally.
Like you mentioned, I am now able to enjoy Class H and tube amplification in the same room, with the same gear, when I choose. Not two systems, but two options which is fun.
I think a special niche for Class D, where it offers undeniable unique benefits that support better sound quality, is as a more practical alternative to traditional big heavy expensive monster amps when lots of power and current is beneficial to drive certain speakers to their max.
That is what led to my foray into Class D. I got the 500 w/ch Bel canto ref1000m amps as my all out assault to drive my big OHm F5s to the max and that has worked out in spades.
There are other practical options in most other cases.
For example, the Bel Canto C5i 60 w/ch integrated I use on my smaller system does it all and the sound is the cats meow (very hard to fault) in that app as well, but there are many amps of many designs in the same power class that can work out just fine there as well. So not as clear a choice there. The C5i does have the other advantages of value (especially used), compact size and manageability, and versatility (includes dac and phone in a package smaller than a shoe box which also has the form factor to fit easily into the rack where it must live).
I would not expect someone who finds set sound to be most appealing to be allured by a Class D amp. It might approach the sound of a set if done a certain way but there is no value in replacing a good SET system with Class D if the SET checks all ones boxes. If volume/macrodynamics is of concern given SET amps low power output the solution is more efficient speakers, not a more efficient amp. A change in amp will likely trigger or necessitate a change in speakers and other things as well, a major ripple effect.
I would see merit perhaps in maintaining two unqiue systems with unique strengths and technical approaches, one SET and one CLass D or similar. That’s an experiment I have on my bucket list still. But frankly the C5i has worked out great and pushed that off for now a bit until such time I have ability or desire to pursue perhaps a third system just to see.
Fascinating... Looks like my last post has dematerialized. I was not aware that what I write is so controversial. Oh well...
To Charles, Mola Mola is a very fine amp, but it might not constitute the "last word" in the application of NCore technology to an amp. In the current Rowland lineup, for example, I have found some amps that I prefer over Mola Mola, and at least one that I like less. E.g. My M925 monos and the M825 stereo are in the top range of my preferred amps, together with Solution and ARC reference amplifiers. Yes, I do prefer them to Mola Mola.
When I listened to Mola Mola, the amp was not fully broken in, so it exhibited some excesses in transient response, and some transient behavior that might have been traces of intermodulation.... Difficult to say if the issues are inherent to the device, or they were a product of incomplete break-in.
Hence, I currently prefer the Pascal M-Pro2-based Rowland Continuum S2 over Mola Mola.... An integrated that I find infinitely graceful.
On the other hand, the Rowland M525 mono based on Pascal S-Pro2 might not be as subtle as Mola Mola.
Note that I have not listened yet to the Rowland M125 bridgeable amp, nor to the Daemon super-integrated... I have heard wonderful things about them, but have no direct experience.
Consider CD's. In the early days, about all audiophiles who did not sell CD players said they were inferior, and they were. Great strides have been made, and there are truly excellent players now. I have never met a person who had tens of thousands of dollars invested in TT's and LP's, and who claimed That records sound better, who had a comparably priced CD player to compare to his beloved pieces of plastic with a needle scratching the surface to make sound, from century old technology. Class D will ultimately evolve and improve. Personally, I haven't heard it yet, but that does not mean it does not exist.
GDHAL: The 1600 watts is peak rms power, not continuous. Plus, with computer regulated power supplies, my 3 amplifiers, each rated at 1500 watts input, can all fill at once at turn on, on a 30 amp circuit. That is 4500 actual watts divided by 120 volts = 37.5 amps, but only if I had totally unregulated power supplies.
Hi Guido, Regarding the notion of dismissing a class based on selected specifications I’m with you 100%, dogma doesn’t work for me. It has to be based on actual listening experiences. I also agree with you in that within any audio product genre inevitably a hierarchy is established, class D amplifiers included. I’m very fond of SET amplification but readily admit there’s a definite spectrum of quality and performance.
I without reservation respect the listening impressions that you and others here have posted pertaining to class D amplifiers, who am I to say that you all are wrong? My point is that by the same token those who’ve listen to these amplifiers and rejected them on sonic/musical grounds have simply expressed themselves openly. I’ll make it a point to hear a Jeff Rowland class D amp based on your genuine enthusiasm. It could certainly be better than the Mola Mola amplifier I’ve heard a couple of times. Charles
Hi Charles, I agree with you, in the following way:
From a sonic point of view, there is really no absolute advantage in principle between one topology and another one.
Rather, there are users that might find a particular amplifier of one topology preferable to another amplifier.... Be the second amplifier of the same topology, or of another one.
Not all class D amplifiers are sonically desirable to my ears... There is a broad range.... From devices that make me cringe, to those that make me swoon.
The same is for amps that are built around other topologies... Thus my love for Solution, ARC amps, and some VTLs.
While there are practical considerations why I am unlikely ever to own VTL or ARC amps to power my Die Muzik speakers (heat dissipation and tube maintenance), the reason why I do not own a Solution amp is pure happenstance.
I also heard a few triod amps that I truly enjoyed, although they are unlikely to be able to drive my speakers to my satisfaction.
So, if I were to use the language of formal logic, I would say that.... For all amps of a given class I have found there exists at least one amp that I have enjoyed.
Finally, as we are all different, it is self evident that what makes me swoon, is likely to leave some other suffering audiophrene totally non-plussed.
As for nixing a class on a couple specs.... Now, that is beyond me to fathom.
Some other manufacturers, such as Merrill Audio, do a thorough "passive" component design around the modules... They implement highly dampened chassis, highest quality internal wiring (e.g. Cardas), and I/O connectors: see for example the Merrill Audio Veritas monos that I have reviewed for PFO a couple years ago. In some cases, like in the entry level Merril Teranis stereo amp, they design custom input stages.
Hi Guido, I was referring to the custom input stages as an example of adding a house sound...such as the tube input stage that Peachtree uses. If all a company does is add a chassis and nice wiring to the I/O connectors using an Ice Module, that is basically a DIY project...which I agree isn't bad if the module is of sufficient quality. I had a DIY setup with the Ice Amp 125ASX2 and unfortunately it didn't meet my expectations with regards to accuracy. It had dead quiet moments during songs that could be viewed as a positive or as artificial blackness.
I have never heard Hypex, but many indicators point to it as being a superior implementation of Class D when compared with ICE Modules.
Charles, "We both would surely agree with the mantra of YMMV." Agreed
Mapman "It’s close minded to infer a product or technology is inferior or deficient just because one prefers something else. That’s all." Again, agreed.
In the end, let your ears tell you what YOU like and lead the way. That is ultimately what is most important.
Yes, I've heard Class D a few times. My dream system is Mbl's entry-level system with a Class D integrated, CD/DAC, and speakers. It makes beautiful music and if the $$ weren't a concern, I would have it already.
Specs and technicalities aside, let your ears lead you to YOUR perfect system. We don't buy our gear to please everyone, just us since we are nearly always the only audience.
Hi Guido, When you say that you and Bill use your own ears and thus determined that class D suits you all I don’t believe anyone here would dispute this conclusion. Those who find class D undesirable are equally credible in their listening evaluations as well. One view doesn’t hold more merit than the other. The verdict is a split decision of yays and nays as with virtually any audiophile/High End topic. What impresses you or Bill may disappoint someone else who just has different taste and sonic criteria. Both sides of of this issue have IMO made compelling points. For there to be implication that if one is critical of class D they’re closed minded is misguided. It just means they listened and were honestly underwhelmed. We both would surely agree with the mantra of YMMV. Charles
Thank you grannyring, yours is an excellent case in point... You and I happened to have adopted class D amps because -- using our own ears *Grins!* -- we fell in love with their sound... And are still in love with what our devices continue to do for us.
Guido and others, the Lyngdorg is one such Class D design with other new and cutting edge technologies implemented. Best sounding amp I have had the pleasure of listening to. It is a dac, room correction, preamp, and amp all in one. This is indeed the future of audio and it is coming fast. I love tube amps and preamps. I love NOS dacs, I love vintage tone. This Lyndorf bettered all those other separates I still love. So Class D with other SOTA technology mixed in can not only be great, it can be stunning and best in class.
Regardless of the technology used in an amp, Class A, AB, D, H etc... It is the implementation that counts. Yes, Class D is implemented differently with emerging SOTA solutions. So buckle-up Aphiles as we are in for a great ride. I will also say this to Class D detractors. Have you heard every Class D option out there in your home? No is the obvious answer. Leave room in your mind for the possibility that Class D with its various implementations may in fact please you.
I am a believer now and was not about 12 months ago. I had heard several Class D amps in my home and in the end thought they were OK. Well Lyngdorf changed that with their particular implenmentation......for me anyway.
Hi seanheis1, amplifier designers modifying class D modules is largely an urban legend.... One of the few amp designers who has done this is Bruno Putzeys, who has made some minor modifications to his own Hypex NCore NC1200 for integration into the Mola Mola Kaluga amplifier that he has also designed.
Rather, Designers who utilize class D amplifier use an incremental design approach to their amp implementations.
For some entry level implementations, it is often possible to limit oneself to housing the power conversion module in a chassis and wiring it to output terminals.... If the module is of very high quality, such as the NC1200, or its NC600 younger brother, the results can still be remarkably good.
Some other manufacturers, such as Merrill Audio, do a thorough "passive" component design around the modules... They implement highly dampened chassis, highest quality internal wiring (e.g. Cardas), and I/O connectors: see for example the Merrill Audio Veritas monos that I have reviewed for PFO a couple years ago. In some cases, like in the entry level Merril Teranis stereo amp, they design custom input stages.
Finally, some manufacturers, like Rowland, utilize the Hypex NCore NC1200 models as component parts of sophisticated amps, where all but the power conversion module is a custom-designed component.... In the M925 monoblock, the power supply is a 2500W DC multi-regulated SMPS unit fed by a power factor corrected rectifier (PFC) where the generated DC is further "whashed" through Jensen 4-pole capacitors to eliminate any residual ripples. The inputs are coupled to very large Lundahl transformers to maximize common mode noise wrejection.... There is a lot more to the technology of the Rowland M925 amps in my own system, but I do not pretend to know all technical details.
Suffice to say that the resulting sound and music are too die for.... The amps are as quiet as can be, and the output is harmonically articulate, with no trace of grain, and certainly without any treble intermodulation that I would otherwise easily detect as harshness in split high string and high brass parts.
Granted, in general NCore amps, the higher end Pascal amps, and also the better ICEpower implementations are not likely to fit the requirements of the lover of triode designs who prefers a slight bloom in the midrange, a warm mid bass, and a gently tapered off treble.
Rather, these amps, once they are well broken in, tend to yield what I like to call a "goldielockian" musicality. In other words, a sonic environment that yields an even harmonic treatement to the entire audible spectrum.... I love it, but admittedly not everyone does.
I owned the Devialet and it sounded very good, however, the Lyngdorf TA2170 with room correction is MUCH better and a very special piece. Check it out folks as it replaced over $15,000 in separates and sounds better.
@arafiq I've had 3 different Peachtree amps (NovaAmp220, Nova 125SE, and Grand Integrated X-1), as well as a Parasound (older HCA-2003 model). The Peachtree amps (with my gear, in my room) all absolutely sounded better than the Parasound. Granted, the A23 is a much newer amp, so I might have favored that one over the Peachtrees, who knows?
@spenrock I agree with your assessment of the Peachtree gear. Their stuff is a great value for what you get. They "punch above their weight class" you could say. I have Peachtree integrateds in two rooms of my house with nothing but a Sonos and Altec Lansing speakers connected to each of them, and I'm not wanting more for these rooms. That said, if you want to spend more, you can certainly get better sound. These aren't reference systems.
I currently have the Nord One Up (Hypex NC500 based) monoblocks in my big system. These have replaced the Peachtree Amp220 and immediately sounded more transparent and dynamic. The new generation of Hypex class D amps are the real deal. These amps use the same Hypex amplifier boards and power supply module that the Bel Canto 600m amps use, and they are a great fit in my system. So far, these are the best of all amps I've used (10s, but not 100s). FWIW I am using a tube pre (PS Audio BHK Pre), power regenerator (PS Audio P10), and large, low impedance speakers (Martin Logan Aeon i), all of which seem to lend themselves well to class D. I'm very happy with the set up.
Regarding the EE Times article, I took a look at some of the many patents that were issued to what was then the author’s company, JAM Technologies. It appears that most or all of their amplifier designs were intended for applications in which the amplification circuitry is provided with digital inputs, and operates exclusively in the digital domain until low pass filtering is applied to the pulse width modulated signal at the amplifier’s output.
Given that, the references in the article to jitter and to quantized output levels seem understandable, but along with the rest of the article would seem to have little if any relevance to class D amplifiers that are driven with analog inputs.
Also, JAM Technologies was described as a fabless semiconductor company (the word "fables" appearing at the end of the article is an obvious error or typo). Their designs appear to have been mainly intended for flat panel TV, PC audio, and personal media player applications, not for higher powered audiophile-oriented applications.
Some additional background I found that may be of interest: The company was founded in 1998 or 1999, and no longer exists. The author of the article was a co-founder of the company, together with another gentleman who was its chief technology officer and the inventor named in most or all of its patents. Both gentlemen left the company within a year or two after the article was published in 2005, and their subsequent professional endeavors have been unrelated to audio or consumer electronics.
Devialet, hah, if you enjoy overpaying by %900 for a basic low level all in one which sounds no better than a Best Buy receiver at 300$, go ahead.
Local stereo shop has these, they are seriously nothing special, I have heard them with those big$$ Cremona speakers, Martin Logan ES speakers, sure the Martin logans go a little louder due to more watts, but those watts are poor.
I must have spent 4-5 hrs in the shop that day as I bought a new CD player, and listened to every room they had. McIntosh monos' , devialet, NAD, A pair of tube amps by McIntosh that were restored by the owner, and 3-4 other amps, several speakers, etc etc. I was not impressed, but my son was, who fell asleep listening to Pink Floyd through the McIntosh/Cremona combo.
If you need small footprint, and are financially stable, go ahead buy them, you will be fine, but there is WAY better for far less, and goosebumps do come with other brands free of charge.
Just my worthless two cents.
-MY humble opinion-
i don't want to come off as a di*k, I'm not, this is only my opinion of my listening experience, if you like them, buy them. I would personally go with another Sunfire Signature 600, send to bill flannerys for a update/overhaul, and be happy for 15+ years.
Nonsense. Not only that I don't know what they mean by "Pumping back the energy" in half bridge configuration (that I use all the time) but at least they don't mention limited resolution. Such statements:
However,
the differential output structure of the
bridge topology inherently can cancel even the
order of harmonic distortion components and
DC offsets, as in Class AB amplifiers. A fullbridge
topology allows of the use of a better
PWM modulation scheme, such as the three
level PWM which essentially has fewer errors
due to quantization.
are gibberish. Just in case your'e interested Icepower is Full Bridge while Hypex is Half bridge. Which one is better - let your ears to be the judge. Full bridge places half of the supply voltage on the speaker wires all the time. Look at incredibly low THD and IMD specifications (and measured data) of class D amps - not possible with non-linear amplifiers. In all this discussion about errors (power supply voltage or dead time) author forgets about negative feedback (dual in Icepower amps). Without this feedback class AB amps would sound like shit.
Their conclusion:
Highly efficient Class D amplifiers now provide
similar performances to conventional Class AB
amplifier
Mapman +1. People are tossing terms like "nonlinear" or "lots of distortion" without even understanding the principle of operation. I can understand when people don't like sound of particular class D amp with their speakers, but tossing pseudo-technical terms is plain silly while starting thread using such terms is ill minded.
The critical fact to bear in mind is that all Class D amplifiers have outputs that are comprised of discrete power increments, a notion that can more easily be thought of as resolution steps.
Class D amplifiers have no "steps" at all. They are analog with unlimited resolution. Author cannot comprehend that in class D amps quantity of interest - voltage is replaced, in linear modulator, by duty cycle .
Amplifier jitter rejection can also be critical
There is no such thing. Analog amplifiers with voltage input have no jitter rejection. Author appears to be uneducated thus unfit to write on the subject.
I`m using a Herron tubed phono stage going into a Tortuga Audio LDR preamp coupled with a Class D Audio SDS 470 and it sounds pretty darn nice to me !
I am toying with the idea of adding a Rogue amp to the mix for a horizontal bi-amp deal, but I`m in no real hurry and I`ll take my sweet time till the right one comes along (used) because this just sounds so good as it is !
Good for you, mate! I should have mentioned that those NAD's are driving Paradigm S-8's. Great sound, and they really tame the beryllium tweeters.
Someone had an earlier post re "large" studio speakers. The monitors I was referring to are small PMC 20/20 Six near-field monitors of my home studio. They were recommended to me by one of the famous Nashville mastering engineers, Glenn Meadows. He uses big PMC's in his master suite and like most large monitors, they are not self-powered and are, as in the common practice, driven by Bryston power amps. But most studio mixing is done on smaller near-field monitors. Most studios have the big ones too, but they are more for show, than go.
I can sort of see why your dealer might sell only Class D and tube amps. The former for clarity and control and the latter for sweet euphonics. Nothing wrong with the latter. That's why we use tube guitar amps and old tube mic pre-amps and emulations, or old recordings. But the former is why we record and store in digital. And i prefer not to add another layer of glaze to the playback. But whatever you like, it's music. Nobody gets hurt.
Kijanki I think it’s easy to obsess on one or two aspects of a product, good or bad, and forget there are many factors that go into it many of which are hard to quantify and further there is no mathematical formula for determining how something actually sounds.
The more I read about it ClassD technology sounded like a good idea to me. My favorite local dealer sold only class d and tube amps. He had never steered me wrong over many years. These days he admits to me that the class d hybrid integrated amps he sells sounds the best with the choice speaker lines he sells and I would agree.
There are more than a couple highly regarded participants here that have accepted the technology as well.
Mapman +1. People are tossing terms like "nonlinear" or "lots of distortion" without even understanding the principle of operation. I can understand when people don't like sound of particular class D amp with their speakers, but tossing pseudo-technical terms is plain silly while starting thread using such terms is ill minded.
As I sit here totally enthralled with what I hear coming out of my big Ohm Walsh speakers (12" Walsh style driver) as I am on most Saturday afternoons when I get a chance to have extended listening sessions I am totally baffled how some have such disdain for the technology. Something ain’t right.
When relating impressions of various class d amps it would help to also mention what speakers were involved.
As I mentioned earlier Clas D will distinguish itself with certain kinds of speakers whereas with others it a harder call and some they will just not shine. Nobody is saying they will always sound best rather they up the game in terms of what is possible out of a package more people might like but only if given the chance to do what they do best.
So I get the obvious strengths of Class D. Efficiency, power output & running cool which allows for small form factors. I also understand the weaknesses somewhat. 1. Non-linear & lots of distortion that needs to be cleaned up with an output filter. So my question is, if it weren't for efficiency & power, would there be any reason to own a Class D amp? Do they beat Class A in any other categories that count for sound quality?
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
