The Truth about Modern Class D

I caught up on this 2018 version of Class D amp discussion from @erik_squires. Same talking points from a lot of the same contributors—right down to cut ‘n paste posts, analogies and jokes from other Class D threads. I found a few kernels of wisdom, though, to make reading every post worthwhile. My favorite? Post by @douglas_schroeder about his parallel IC method and the response by @erik_squires. 😂😂

@erik_squires
The Schroeder Method for parallel IC’s works, but strongly recommended against its use with class D amplifier topologies owing to the increased bandwidth of signal transmission of the IC’s into the realm of the switching frequencies of those designs. I think folks should (and do) evaluate all component changes in the context of their entire system with respect to SQ improvements.

Doug’s opinion (as shared by many, including me) is that the improvements in SQ afforded by parallel IC’s can be equivalent to exchanging a component elsewhere in the system. I’m not so certain that the use of parallel IC’s over single-run IC’s actually trumps exchanging a component, per se. But using a non-class D amplifier topology might enable some to improve the overall SQ of their system with use of a full loom of parallel IC’s from source to final amplification. 

Sorry for the duplicative (and now-deleted) posts. System error with the site and not the user. 😬😬

My previous post is made against a backdrop of using a Spectron class D amp to drive Dunkavy SC-IVa’s. So I readily accept using a single-run of IC’s from the preamp to the class D amp.

@tweak1
I never receive notifications about new posts. I recently noticed the autocorrect features of the forum posts no longer work. And the search engine functions of the forum are now disabled (zero hits as search results).