Those quotes have little value with out a date. In my opinion any criticism is welcome, but it would be more helpful if it were based on listening to actual, specific components, not a google search. And did you have to make fun of the Special Olympics and athletes with disabilities as a way to criticize class D? Not cool. Many of those athletes are more more fit and better athletes than 99% of the general population.
Class D amplifiers. What's the future look like?
I have a number of amplifiers: Luxman C900U, Bryston 4BSST2, Audio Research VSI 60 Integrated, NAD C298 and some other less noteworthy units. As I swap them in and out of my main system, I've come to the conclusion my very modest NAD C298 is about all I really need. Granted if I had extremely hard to drive speakers, I might be better with the Bryston or Luxman, but driving my Harbeth 40.2 speakers, the NAD is just fine.
I thought a while ago that class D would quickly overtake amplifier design type mainly due to profit margin which I think would be much greater than A/B and tube. I'm not saying the other design styles would go away, just that D would be the most common style.
Clearly my prediction is not panning out, at least in the mid and high-end audio world and I'm wondering why? It seems companies such as Bryston, Luxman, McIntosh, Hegel and so many others are sticking by A/B. I'm no "golden ears" guy, but is the perceived sound issue(weather real or imaginary) still holding D back? Maybe my assumption of profit margin is not correct? Maybe the amplifier manufacturers are experimenting with D, but keeping tight lipped until release? Perhaps brand loyalists don't want change similar to what happened with "new coke". What else am I missing?
- ...
- 159 posts total
@inna are you familiar with the law of diminishing returns? |
The "Law" of diminishing return which is not a law but an observation had two faces: a subjective side and an objective side... The subjective side is related to our own acoustic history and learnings and limits in qualitative discerning power and abilities... The objective side of this observation reflect the ALWAYS NECESSARY optimal trade-off choices or the non optimal one , introduced in the audio gear system by any components design limits when embedded in a room optimally or not and coupled with other design reflecting other trade-off choices too ... Most people confuse this two correlated side of a problem with a "law" which anyway is not a law but an observation about the psycho-acoustic subjective factors and the objective audio design factors, they reduce or simplify it for everyone with a negation of the alleged claim that " improving" or "upgrading" ONLY the gear will NECESSARILY improve the acoustic and psycho-acoustic experience, most people reduce and simplify this observation even more when they say that the hypothetical claim about a direct linear link between price and acoustic quality experience is false ... This observation , called improperly a "law" , is a very astute and true observation of a complex psycho-acoustic problem coupled to acoustic and physical material electronic design ... ... |
- 159 posts total