Let me note that MEGAschino is not a typical representative of class D: it is quite heavy (about 20 kilos) Because it has a linear power supply using a massive toroidal transformer, which to me is a good thing, never been keen on noisy switch-modes no matter how well built. Patented and proprietary circuitry designed in-house. Could be good, no off the shelf stuff like many others use. Still nothing on how it handles 2ohm loading and if it’s got good current drive down that low (increasing it’s wattage a lot from 4ohms) https://www.cherryamp.com/dac-home Cheers George |
Class d is the big girl with the pretty face, or the chain smoker with nice legs. |
In a Class D amp this would only describe how loud it plays at 2 ohms without sonic impact not much else. Damping factor at the frequencies where impedance drops is far more important. Still nothing on how it handles 2ohm loading and if it’s got good current drive down that low (increasing it’s wattage a lot from 4ohms) |
Could we combine pretty face with nice legs without chain smoker
in class D?
My speakers (Thiel CS 6) go down to 2.5 ohms at 8 kHz, the output impedance of Megaschino is measured at 10
kHz. I did not note any damping problem though am a bit surprised with the power issue.
Supposedly it gives over 600 watts at 4 ohms, that i do not really perceived (I feel it gives about half of that, though its power is quite sufficient for my needs).
|
Could we combine pretty face with nice legs without chain smoker in class D?
Not yet affordable, one day maybe, or now if you can afford the Technics SE-R1, it addressed all of the ugly's of Class-D dead time (big girl) and switching frequency (chain smoker). Cheers George |
George,
I cannot affirm anything certain on this, but, perhaps, there is a doctor that already can already convince the girl not to smoke, chain smoker is no more needed. The girl then would shine with her legs and face.
According to Tommy O from Digital Audio Company, their module design is already fast enough so that there is no further need in GaN-based technology (used, e.g., in Technics SE R1). I am citing what he wrote to me in this regard (please note that i am unable to judge on the technical part/proof for his statements):
citing :
" I wanted to mention this before…. These GaN based Class-D amps have the same issue as other non-Cherry Class-D in that they are going for bench specs as opposed to sonic excellence. Without getting too into the technical aspects, GaN FETs require use of support chips that don’t support our unique topology, and our design is different in that it’s already super fast (the benefit of GaN is supposed to be speed). We are able to achieve better bench specs than any other Class-D we’ve seen, but we “tune” the modulation and control for best sound, and this costs a few dB here and there -- but sounds better. For example, the MEGA design can reach about 130dB and 0.0004% THD on the bench before tweaking for sonics. This is with non-GaN FETs. After tweaking, the specs are still great (120dB and 0.001% THD), but the smoothness is preserved, and the harsh/analytic sound of other amplifiers is not anything we want coming out of a Cherry Amp!! We are always getting compliments on sound quality, and this is the “proof in the pudding”. "
|
GaN based Class-D in that they are going for bench specs as opposed to sonic excellence. I worry when a manufacturer says this, (trust me it sound better) We are able to achieve better bench specs than any other Class-D we’ve seen Then further down he says this????? (hang on he just said spec don’t matter) The proof’s in the pudding when we see independent measured specs on. what switching frequency used output filter corner frequency switching frequency residue on output dead time performace phase shift figures from 2khz to 20khz rms output wattage just before clipping into 8ohm, 4ohm and 2ohm. All of which are known Achilles Heel’s of class-d Cheers George |
@georgehifi, Tommy's MEGAschino MK2 specs into 2 Ohms;
MEGAschino channel boards are capable of comfortably driving 1000W into 4Ω and up to 2000W into 2Ω
|
Measurements of Tommy's old amps are online. No issues into 2 Ohm except a hit of hit on frequency response. |
comfortably driving 1000W into 4Ω and up to 2000W into 2Ω That’s way too vague. Just like Merrill quotes. Ask him this, it should be done by independent bench testing, but he should tell the truth. In stereo what is the RMS wattage "both channels driven just before clipping"into 4ohms @ 1khz In stereo what is the RMS wattage "both channels driven just before clipping"into 2ohms @1khz See if you get a straight answer, not even Merrill would give an answer to this and I asked 2 or 3 times on the Element 118’s (true monoblocks not bridged stereos) their was a dead silence with this like he never seen the posts, even though he happily answered many others I asked, and his amps are in a higher league than these I believe. Cheers George |
I did not understand what kind of patent is this as class D amps are widely used for already more than a decade. 2 decades actually, but that does not mean that everything to be known about them is already known. The proof’s in the pudding when we see independent measured specs on.
what switching frequency used
output filter corner frequency
switching frequency residue on output
dead time performace
phase shift figures from 2khz to 20khz
rms output wattage just before clipping into 8ohm, 4ohm and 2ohm.
All of which are known Achilles Heel’s of class-d
This type of generalization is problematic! A self-oscillating class D amp can have a fairly low switching frequency (400KHz for example) and consequential low filter frequency (80KHz) and yet little or no phase shift at audio frequencies. This is because a self-oscillating class D amp can run so much feedback that it can correct phase shift and even distortion caused by the application of loop negative feedback. In order to do this the feedback has to be in excess of 35dB which is nearly impossible with conventional amplification due to poor gain bandwidth product. But gain is easy to create in class D circuits. |
atmasphere,
Would you say there is inherent limitation in the phase shift that is a factor of the comparator speed, digital logic delays, and turn-off time of the FET? What do you think a practical limit is on that? That may put a practical limit of a few-10 degrees at 20Khz, but that would be inaudible.
|
Hello atmasphere,
As I understand it from you and Bruno Putzeys as a layman, there is no such thing as too much feedback with class D amplification. The generally accepted concept that feedback negatively effects the sound quality of traditional linear amplifiers may be true, but this aversion to feedback doesn't apply to class D amplifier design. Very high levels of feedback, in an intelligently designed class D amp, are actually utilized to optimize the sound quality throughout the entire audible frequency spectrum.
Am I understanding this correctly?
Thanks,
Tim
|
Very high levels of feedback, in an intelligently designed class D amp, are actually utilized to optimize the sound quality throughout the entire audible frequency spectrum. This can also be said about linear amps, but they sound crap when done. The goal is to have the best engineered design with the lowest distortions without negative feedback, and then if it can be done just a little local feedback around the input/driver stage to clean things up, but no global feedback compassing the output stage as well. It was Matti Otala back in 1970-80’s that was the guy behind it all in solid state amps, and is still used today by the very best, but hard to design for. Look for today's amps that say in their description/specs "no global negative feedback" Cheers George |
This can also be said about linear amps, but they sound crap when done.
The goal is to have the best engineered design with the lowest
distortions without negative feedback, and then if it can be done just a
little local feedback around the input/driver stage to clean things up,
but no global feedback compassing the output stage as well. This is but one design methodology, and to say unequivocally it is the best is ... a leap not shared by all. It is more religion than science. Can you define the time domain characteristics of feedback in a Class-D amp and linear amp? |
The proof will be in the pudding, as there are Class-D’s coming out with little or no feedback, Merrill Elements being just one with it’s said to be a very good sound. From EE Online "If none of these issues are addressed, it is difficult to achieve PSRR better than 10 dB, or total harmonic distortion (THD) better than 0.1 percent. The standard solution for compensate for the poor performance of a Class-D system is to add negative feedback, but a large amount of negative feedback increases Transient Intermodulation Distortion (TIMD)." Question is does Putzey’s designs with large amounts of feedback, ever state TIMD "Transient Intermodulation Distortion" I think not only ever seen THD specified https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b3c0/a892a982ebde91f83f228905dac30186f827.pdf Cheers George |
Would you say there is inherent limitation in the phase shift that is a
factor of the comparator speed, digital logic delays, and turn-off time
of the FET? What do you think a practical limit is on that? That may put
a practical limit of a few-10 degrees at 20Khz, but that would be
inaudible. The phase shift is indirectly related to the speed of parts like the comparitor (which typically has plenty of more speed than the output section). It is directly related to the filter at the output. As I understand it from you and Bruno Putzeys as a layman, there is
no such thing as too much feedback with class D amplification. The
generally accepted concept that feedback negatively effects the sound
quality of traditional linear amplifiers may be true, but this aversion
to feedback doesn't apply to class D amplifier design. Very high levels
of feedback, in an intelligently designed class D amp, are actually
utilized to optimize the sound quality throughout the entire audible
frequency spectrum.
Am I understanding this correctly?
That's it in a nutshell. The problem is phase shift in traditional designs prevents the application of the required amount of feedback in such amps; otherwise oscillation will occur. For this reason **every tube and solid state amplifier made has had insufficient feedback**. This has resulted in the applied feedback adding its own distortion- which is interpreted by the ear as brightness and harshness. This is why every amplifier with feedback up until now has sounded brighter and harsher than real life, and has fueled the tubes vs transistor debate all these decades. The industry has also been complicit in this problem, so when you see harmonic distortion measurements the fundamental frequency is usually fairly low (60Hz is common) so as to not get in trouble with the gain bandwidth product limitations of the amp under measurement! And this also explains why zero feedback amplifiers (like our OTLs) exist, as by designing a circuit that is linear enough to run without feedback the harshness and brightness of feedback is avoided. Transient Intermodulation Distortion is a symptom of poor feedback loop design coupled with poor gain bandwidth product and insufficient feedback. Can you define the time domain characteristics of feedback in a Class-D amp and linear amp? Yes. In a class D amp its all about propagation delay. In a conventional amplifier its all about phase shift as capacitive strays roll off the response (introducing phase shift). Effectively both have the same effect- at some high frequency the feedback is no longer negative so oscillation can occur. But unlike a conventional design, in a class D you can take advantage of that oscillation by using it as the switching frequency. |
atmasphere,
Thanks for the very good info on amp feedback.
On a totally different subject, I just bought a pair of pre-owned Magnepan 3.7i speakers to replace my current almost 25 year old 2.7QR panels. I'm thinking my Levinson 326S preamp (very quiet, neutral, detailed while portraying a very good soundstage) and pair of D-Sonic M3-600-M class D monos (1,200 watts into 4 ohms) will be a good match with the 3.7i but I won't know for sure until they're installed tomorrow and can begin listening.
I'm just going to listen, evaluate and hopefully enjoy this combination for a few months. I have high expectations but, as we all know, the proof's in the sound quality and our subjective opinion.
If I don't thoroughly enjoy the results, I'll probably be in the market for a new pair of fully balanced monos, preferably class D. I'd love to audition your new class D amps if I'm in the market, before I purchase anything else and if they'll be available for audition and possible purchase in the next 3-6 month timeframe. I understand if you're currently reluctant to share any definitive information but would appreciate any info you're comfortable sharing at this point. I'm very curious and interested in listening to your efforts.
Thanks,
Tim
|
We're still working with prototypes. They have had 100 watts and double power into 4 ohms. Since last spring, they have had GaNFET output sections. We compare them directly against our tube OTLs as a reference. Mostly we've been sorting out layout issues; designing a class D from scratch using individual parts is challenging if you want high switching speeds! But we've been sorting things out, sometimes one at a time as problems are identified and solved.
|
Hello atmasphere,
Thank you for your very good update on your class D amp development. Very interesting, although not very surprising, that you decided to utilize GaN FETs in your design given their ultra fast switching on/off capacity which enables the elimination of dead-time and lowers distortion. I’m not sure if you discovered yet what Merrill, of Merrill Audio, stated that he has discovered: that the newer GaN transistors don’t perform as well as some of the older examples.
I remain very interested in listening to your new class D amps in my system. I recently upgraded my system with a pre-owned Levinson 326S preamp and Magnepan 3.7i speakers. I’m currently using a pair of D-Sonic M3-600-M mono-block class D amps rated at 1,200 watts @ 4 ohms that are performing very well driving the 3.7is.
I understand the 3.7is likely don’t require 1,200 watts to perform optimally but I believe they benefit from a ready and steady availability of high current. My issue is that I’m uncertain if 200 watts @ 4 ohms would be sufficient for them. I’m also uncertain whether there would be a net overall sound quality gain in my system by utilizing very well designed class D amps, with reduced dead-time and distortion, but perhaps less than optimum current availability. I’ll likely only find out for certain by auditioning them in my system.
Have you made a decision yet on whether you’ll be offering free limited in-home trial periods for auditioning?
Thanks,
Tim
|
Have you made a decision yet on whether you’ll be offering free limited in-home trial periods for auditioning? We're not nearly that far along! With regards to GaN performance, they can be variable depending on who made them and their intended application. Many of them have a reverse diode conduction phase which can really throw the designer for a loop. While they are faster, MOSFETs have been steadily getting faster too so at practica switching speeds we're seeing now in another year or two MOSFETs will probably work just as well. One problem we're seeing is its very easy to build a class D with a very high damping factor, much higher than any speaker should really see. |
Hello atmosphere,
Please don't treat my occasional post questions directed to you, and your vast amp design knowledge and experience, as anything even remotely close to an attempt at rushing your class D amp design and development efforts. Of course, I understand you're going to take whatever time you deem necessary at every progression in the nuts and bolts process of creating a high quality class D amp that bears your company's well respected name.
My layman aim remains the same, which is just to seek out and utilize high quality system components that maximizes my music and HT listening experiences. Having subject matter experts, such as yourself, explain things to me in an easily understood, relatable manner while educating my posterior along the way just happens to be a much appreciated bonus. Thank you.
For example, your concern about excessive damping factors on class D amps is something I can relate to due to experiencing its effects on my system's performance. I've previously driven a pair of Magnepan 2.7QR speakers in my system with three different brands/models of high powered and high damping factor class D amps, two stereo units and a pair of mono-blocks. It was immediately very apparent to me with all three that the bass response was more prominent than with any of the numerous non-class D amps I'd previously used on these same speakers.
At the time, I considered this very powerful, taut, dynamic and prominent bass response the best I'd ever experienced on the 2.7QRs, that are 3-ways with a rather large 623 square inch dipole planar-magnetic bass panel section on each speaker. However, I subsequently purchased an Audio Kinesis Debra 4-sub distributed bass array system with all four subs powered by a 1K watt class AB amp/control unit. I continued to drive the 2.7QRs full-range (down to their rated bass extension of 35 Hz +/- 3db) with the class D amps and the 4-sub bass system was restricted to reproducing only the bass content from 20-40 Hz.
The bass with this setup was definitely improved in power, detail, dynamics and especially realism and naturalness. Over time and in retrospect, I slowly became aware that while I really enjoyed the bass response solely reproduced by the class D amps and the 2.7QRs, the bass sounded much better with the AK Debra system included. My theory is that the very high damping factors unique to class D amps was truncating the decay times of the bass notes. The four Debra subs, being powered by a class AB amp that has a lower damping factor and did not shorten the decay times of bass notes, therefore allowing the bass to sound more realistic, detailed and natural. Does this make sense to you?
Thanks,
Tim
|
My theory is that the very high damping factors unique to class D amps was truncating the decay times of the bass notes. IMO it is possible to overdamp loudspeakers and thus truncate the bass notes, ending up with a coloration called 'tight bass'. In this regard, amps have outstripped loudspeakers in terms of advancing the art. What I mean by this is for an amplifier to be a true voltage source, it has to have a very low output impedance, and while most speakers (certainly not all!) are meant to be driven by a voltage source amplifier, the simple fact is that they also should not be overdamped, and most high powered solid state amps do just that. No speaker made needs more than about 20:1 as a damping factor. But we see amps that have 500:1 and more- there is no way these amps can avoid coloring the bass as a result. IOW I agree with your observations. |
|
Merry Christmas and Happy new Year to all.
@noble100
@georgehifi
When listening to a system, a person can decide whether this is their sound or not. A year ago, I auditioned the top Devialet amp, and thought "this is not my sound" I had a similar feeling with McIntosh Labs setup 25 years ago. This never means they are bad products, but they are not for me. In the domain of hi-fi, each person has their sound as much as they have their music. Even in theatres, we have a preference for certain seats over others. Our ears are the judge and though we casually ask friends and family for their views, the ultimate decisions remains one's own ears.
Also, a system sounds as good as its weakest component. So, this is why reviewers list associated equipment including cables in order to contextualise their verdict on the item being reviewed.
In my time, I owned tubes, hybrids, pure class A, AB, and D. For power amplification, I currently have two listening spaces, one with an AB amp, the other with D monoblocs. The D monoblocs sound great. There is no noise, no distortion, and I do not have to keep them on 24/7.
|
I currently have two listening spaces, one with an AB amp, the other with D monoblocs. The D monoblocs sound great.
Ok I'll bite, which do you prefer the "sound of" forget everything else? Cheers George |
Hello serhan62,
I've become a big fan of class D amps through research and personal experience gained by using several examples in my own system. But I believe all amp types have their pros, cons, compromises and limitations and that class D amps are not the best choice for everyone.
I believe it's very important to match the amp(s) used to one's speakers while also considering one's personal preferences and tastes. I understand the truth is that all amp types are capable of providing excellent sound quality and performance results when properly matched to one's speakers but that all amp types are not suitable for all speaker types.
I also know that, once an individual discovers a good match between amp(s) and their speakers that performs well and they enjoy the sound quality of or even numerous combinations, I have absolutely no interest or concern in dissuading them from utilizing that combination or combinations.
Tim |
Thanks for the post Erik, I had not seen that NP article. There were some good papers in the 70s on current source amps.
I agree with Atmosphere, you can overdamp some speakers. I am not sure I totally agree with your and his explanation wrt how bass notes behave or wrt what is natural, but agree there is an effect and it may not be pleasant.
It's a complex interaction of mechanical resonance, electrical resonance, and mechanical and electrical damping which occurs when you try to stop a woofer faster than it is physically capable of. |
audiozenology:"
It's a complex interaction of mechanical resonance, electrical resonance, and mechanical and electrical damping which occurs when you try to stop a woofer faster than it is physically capable of."
Hello audiozenology,
I believe a thorough comprehension of how excessively high damping factors effect bass sound quality requires less concentration on how complex the interaction of forces are and more on the fact that an amp with high damping factors results in it having very firm control over the starting and stopping of a woofer in a conventional dynamic speaker and the bass diaphragm section of a planar-magnetic or electrostatic panel speaker.
The critical part is to have a thorough understanding that it's the amp's firm control over the bass transducers that can cause truncated bass tone decays and that a thorough understanding of the exact complex interactions involved are less important.
Tim
|
Tim,
In theory the "signal" stops and starts as recorded so that is accurate. The problem is the woofer does not stop right away. In a lower damping factor amp the output resistance will help dissipate the energy in the woofer which can give it a more controlled stop. With a high damping factor all the energy is dissipated in the woofer / crossover. That makes for a different sound.
|
IMO it is possible to overdamp loudspeakers and thus truncate the bass notes
This statement gives a wrong impression for amplifiers output impedance. That should really be. There are a small minority of speakers that are "overdamped" by bad design or being purposely overdamped designed, and it's the speaker manufacturer problem to get the "Q" correct. Not because the amp is over-damped or underdamped. And amps are also supposed to measure as flat as possible regardless of load impedance they see. From the Speaker design bible
.707 is said to be the correct "Q" with respect to damping. A higher Q indicates a woofer that is underdamped (loose) while a number lower than .707 indicates an overly damped woofer.
There is no such thing as too low for an amps output impedance. They even build speakers with "driver servo control circuits" to control the bass driver excursions even more and faster than the amps can do. A classic example of trying to corner the amp/speaker market was the Linn/Naim scam of the 80's when a "purposely overdamped speaker" was mated with a "purposely under damped amp", when together they were a match and sounded good. When either were substituted for something else and there was either, no bass because of being too tight, or too much soft woolly bass. When a Krell was substituted for the amp, there was very little bass, (what!!! a Krell with no bass!!) that raised the eyebrows. Needless to say this idea was Linn/Naim was exposed eventually and they did stopped doing it probably through fear of being called cheats, great marketing idea though if you have no conscience. Cheers George |
Servo controlled woofer is much different from a low output impedance amplifier connected to a woofer that will keep moving after the amplifier signal goes to 0. A servo controlled woofer can be designed to smoothly stop a woofer without any ringing if so desired.
"Damped" and damping factor are of course not the same thing. Damping factor is a simple output impedance / 8 Ohm calc. "Damped" refers to how or the characteristic of how a system will respond to a step response.
Speakers are designed to be driven typically by constant voltage sources. Dynamic drivers on the other hand can behave better, i.e. lower distortion with constant current sources. To that end, all speakers are the product of trade-offs, and designing for 0 output impedance forces other trade offs a particular designer may not want to make. The amplifier is part of the circuit that governs how the speaker will behave. We can talk about a "perfect" world, but dynamic drivers are already imperfect. So better to discuss which imperfections you want to live with.
|
Servo controlled woofer is much different from a low output impedance amplifier I didn’t say it was the same, I said it controls even better the cone movement than the amps damping factor alone can. I’ve asked you three times now, go away please, and stop stalking my posts. |
This is a public forum. I will respond to the content of your posts if I please. That is how public forums work. You didn't start this thread. Lose the attitude.
An amplifier with a high damping factor may limit the total error energy in the woofer cone movement, which could be one measurement of "better", but there is no guarantee that will sound better, because the energy may be concentrated over a narrow frequency range (ringing) that is audible, compared to what happens with an amplifier with a lower damping factor. This is not a new concept, and is explored in the item linked by Nelson Pass, and has been discussed on/off since the 70's.
This is much different from a servo controlled woofer movement where the actual physical position is directly controlled, not an indirect via the coil wires (and through the cross-over).
|
In theory the "signal" stops and starts as recorded so that is accurate.
The problem is the woofer does not stop right away. In a lower damping
factor amp the output resistance will help dissipate the energy in the
woofer which can give it a more controlled stop. This is of course the theory but in practice (IOW the real world) is not a thing. The woofer never 'stops'; its always in motion; there is no recording where the woofer 'stops'. The only way for it to 'stop' as often described abover is if a DC pulse is being reproduced, which is something that neither the amp or speaker will ever have to do. On this account I've often viewed this as a red herring. More to the point, the idea is that the woofer will continue to oscillate after the initial pulse. But in reality after the woofer moves the first way, the audio signal directs it in the opposite way; it never gets the signal removed and so can't ring. This is why amps with a low damping factor can do quite well in the bass. The real problem isn't ringing or distortion, but getting too much bass if the amp fails to reduce power into impedance peaks of the woofer's impedance curve. This isn't a control issue (which is also a problematic idea), its simply that an amp with insufficient low impedance will simply make too much power. |
Can you read your full last paragraph? I think the wording in your last two sentences contradicts though I know what you mean. I agree this is an issue. I also agree that the audio signal never stops, but decays within bandwidth limits. However overly low impedance can accentuate ringing. I get the impression you would be familiar with snubber circuits? It is similar to a resistor in series with the capacitor. The resistance is needed to damp ringing.
|
Can you read your full last paragraph? Yes- in rereading it, it makes sense to me... However overly low impedance can accentuate ringing. I get the impression you would be familiar with snubber circuits? It is similar to a resistor in series with the capacitor. The resistance is needed to damp ringing. Usually those snubbers you see in amps are for the amp’s benefit, not that of the loudspeaker. But keep in mind almost any amplifier will provide damping to almost any loudspeaker. But the simple fact remains that there is no signal in audio where the ability to stop on a dime is important. As I just pointed out, once the woofer nears the zero crossing point it will want to keep going for a bit, but once it gets to the zero crossing point whatever signal that allowed it to get there will also be calling on it to continue in the same direction past the zero crossing point. There never is a point where the woofer stops unless the amp is shut off. So the two points of stopping are: *a DC pulse, or * the amp being turned off In either event no audiophile listens to either so its moot :) |
I was thinking more of snubbers for diodes (transformers), but realistically any circuit with reactive elements. The output impedance of the amplifier is part of the overall electrical circuit and hence the total electro-mechanical assembly and hence impacts ringing/resonance. I guess I made my point poorly ;-)
|
@noble100 Hi Tim, Thank you. Very well said indeed! I've become a big fan of class D amps through research and personal experience gained by using several examples in my own system. But I believe all amp types have their pros, cons, compromises and limitations and that class D amps are not the best choice for everyone.
I believe it's very important to match the amp(s) used to one's speakers while also considering one's personal preferences and tastes. I understand the truth is that all amp types are capable of providing excellent sound quality and performance results when properly matched to one's speakers but that all amp types are not suitable for all speaker types.
I also know that, once an individual discovers a good match between amp(s) and their speakers that performs well and they enjoy the sound quality of or even numerous combinations, I have absolutely no interest or concern in dissuading them from utilizing that combination or combinations.
It's about time to start enjoying music! Happy New Year |
@georgehifi Ok I'll bite, which do you prefer the "sound of" forget everything else? Hi George, Context allows us to appreciate each system on its own merit. Let me put it this way: it is like comparing reference-grade analogue playback to reference-grade digital playback. You stop worrying about sound quality and focus on the music, right? I am at this point already (within my budget constraints of course). For the sake of the argument, the AB stereo amp has been driving a pair of Martin Logan speakers for six years, and the D mono blocks have been driving a pair of Dynaudio contours for more than a year. Both setups reproduce music that engages me, my family and my visitors. No defects, no failures. What else could I ask for? Wish you all happy listening :) |
That went nowhere for me.🤷♂️
Would have been nice to know what each amp sounded like driving both speakers, oh well, thanks I guess.🤷♂️
Cheers George
|
I wish you all to enjoy the sound that you get from your current audio gear, and further, to be able to improve it according to your needs and taste. Perhaps, there is no absolute audio reproduction that is equally good for all. Besides, sometimes a good or bad quality recording makes much more difference than thousands of dollars spent on the upgrades and "improvement". Everything in this life is relative (as Einstein has
taught). On an ideal recording reproduced on an ideal equipment you may get what you want, but it is difficult to have permanently both of them...
Happy New Year! |
I have the Stellar S300 and it is, without a doubt, NOT bright in my system.
Maybe look Kat your speakers???
IDK. |
It's not a speaker issue, but it was the gain cell preamp. I bought first Stellar and then after a few months the pre. Before that i used Stellar 300 with a Mcintosh pre. After some hours of break in gain cell sounds better though its not perhaps an ideal pre for Stellar. What pream are you using?
|
@niodari I'm using my headphone amplifier as my preamp, the Burson Conductor V2+. Digital to analog conversion is taking place elsewhere in a separate DAC (I don't use the DAC inside the Burson). |
I also used Neprime headphone amp |
Hpa 9 as preamp with Stellar s 300 with a quite good outcome. Gain cell is not as good but still is getting better with more hours. |
So, Niodari, you still have, and are breaking-in the PS Audio Gain Cell DAC/Pre? How many hours do you have on it so far?
|
It should have already about 150 hours (almost enogh). It did get better, after all it's not that bad. Dac is not excellent but perhaps aceptable for some settings and pre has i think 8 inputs. It does not get hot (even warm) and consums only 20 watts. I do not peceive a lot of distortion in sound.
|
Thanks....I hope it works out for you ultimately....that would be the easiest solution for you!
I am very curious about the Nuprime AMG preamp recently released.
It has adjustable gain and a sophisticated bass management system.
I wonder how it would match up with the PS Audio S300. I'm tempted to get hold of one to try.
|
