Class D Amplification Announcement


After 60 some odd years of disappointment, Class D has finally arrived. As per The Absolute Sound’s Jonathan Valin, the Borrenson-designed Aavik P-580 amp “is the first Class D amplifier I can recommend without the usual reservations. …the P-580 does not have the usual digital-like upper-mid/lower-treble glare or brick wall-like top-octave cut-off that Class D amps of the past have evinced.”

Past designers of Class D and audiophiles, rejoice; Michael Borrenson has finally realized the potential of Class D.

psag

there is no top sparkle, midrange has never had lively crunch as A or AB no matter how many times you sell your selves they are so awesome, better than class A or AB,                ................Nobody says it's better than A- A/B...It's a "new sound" for people that like to try new things.......Chevy isn't better than Ford....It's just different. If you want to hear the difference and you have a pre amp...get the Orchard Audio Starcrimson mono blocks for $1599 and rock out..TAS Budget product of the year. Just Enjoy the music.

I’m assuming folks making comprehensive statements about what class D amps do not do have heard them all.  

Hey, the little unassuming 30€ Sure Wondom Tripath amp (TA2024) turned me into a believer. I plugged my very revealing OGY speakers into my amp and, yeah, it just sounds fine. To the point where I forget about the gear and just enjoy the music. My previous Yamaha RN402 amp (your typical entry-level Yamaha A/B amp) didn’t sound nearly as detailed in the midrange and treble (from memory). Look, this is not a comprehensive review. It’s just a positive experience. I wish that this 30€ amp had more than 10W of power. I would honestly pay 1000€ for a high end Tripath implementation (or equivalent) with 60W of power. But that does not exist because Tripath went bankrupt.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. The bashing of audio reviewers by audiophiles who are themselves wannabe reviewers; it’s been sport as long as there have been audiophiles. Out of control egos who are so convinced that it is in their opinions, and their opinions only, where truth can be found. These audiophiles always forget that there is, and always will be, no substitute for personal experience with a product. The usefulness of audio reviews is simply as guides to making a more informed buying decision; no more. This requires following a reviewer’s  output in order to gain a good understanding of where the reviewer is coming from. One isolated review is of little value; context is key. For me, the ultimate value of reviews is determined not only by what the reviewer says (writes), but also by how he says it. Attitude counts for a lot in my book. So, speaking of attitude:

In this thread we have the comments of two reviewers with distinctly different attitudes. One comes on like a bull in a china closet lambasting a publication that has been at the forefront of this hobby much longer than most and insults the integrity of a specific reviewer for that publication. The other reviewer, the subject of this attack, responds in a gracious manner, explains his position and demonstrates reasonableness all the way around. Hmmm…… which of these two reviewers will I be most inclined to go to for, if not “truth”, a guide to help me make a more informed buying decision? A no brainer in my book.

Re the bull’s main (I think) criticism of the mentioned publication: He forgets (or is simply unaware of the fact) that since it’s inception, one of this publication’s main stated tenets has been to never base a review on comparisons to other products; only to the sound of music itself instead. That is where having “a good understanding of where the reviewer is coming from” comes in. Imagine that…a comparison to the actual sound of music. What a quaint proposition!

 

The bashing of audio reviewers by audiophiles who are themselves wannabe reviewers; it’s been sport as long as there have been audiophiles. Out of control egos who are so convinced that it is in their opinions, and their opinions only, where truth can be found. These audiophiles always forget that there is, and always will be, no substitute for personal experience with a product. The usefulness of audio reviews is simply as guides to making a more informed buying decision; no more. This requires following a reviewer’s output in order to gain a good understanding of where the reviewer is coming from. One isolated review is of little value; context is key. For me, the ultimate value of reviews is determined not only by what the reviewer says (writes), but also by how he says it.

@frogman Bull in the china shop here. As a reviewer I think this is very, very well said. Learning to read between the lines of any review is key to getting the most out of it. Sorry for coming across maybe a bit too strong, but I, like many audiophiles, am passionate about this hobby and sometimes I’m not as “gracious” as maybe I should be and for that I do apologize and will try to do better on that score down the road. All that said I still strongly disagree with both you and Andy about the importance of comparisons as there can be significant unreliability of judging a piece of audio equipment without them. I’ve been proven at least partially wrong on my initial assessments almost every time once I compare a review product to something else, which is why I think comparisons are critical for not only getting it right but also for providing crucial context for both the reviewer and the reader thus making the review more accurate, informative, and useful in conveying how a component really sounds.  Anyway…