Class D amplifiers. What's the future look like?

So, if I understand you correctly @mahgister then the idea that the old school separate pre amp and amp approach being "better" would sort of fall under the bigger is better type of logic, as well?

I've only had my tdai 2170 for a little less than 2 weeks but so far the biggest trade off I've been able to observe is something I read about in nearly all of the reviews is what I can now confirm as the blackest background ever. I'm sure someone's gonna show up  lately to dispute the virus of the approach, which I understand very little about b/c I have zero interest around the subject matter, But plenty of our members do!

And I know not everyone around here is into the high end cable thing but I'm a Nordost kind of guy, which is a very freaking expensive habit so how nice is it to be able to cut out some of that cost ... as another true trade off of the approach.

so far, the trade offs are sounding pretty sweet!

@soix LMAO 

Pretty hilarious!

Can someone please explain the wire with gain concept? 

My understanding is that it's both a pretty cool and also a novel approach, but I'm not real hip to the technical stuff, esp the Pros and Cons. I rely on the opinions of others for that. This thread appears to have some of the most well informed members, tho.

For what it's worth, style is actually not only something that I take into account, but it's part of the reason I moved in this direction. I personally find the Lyngdorf style to be sexy as hell and it goes along with my decor beautifully. Very modern and cool with clean lines and not only does it only have 2 knobs on the front ... the action on the volume knob is totally freaking cool.       : )

@deep_333 I've seen that list of quotes before. They got debunked due to their age. 

A lot of those quotes you listed are from nearly 20 years ago. At that time I was of the same opinion as seen in them. One way you can date the quotes: look at Thorsten Loesch's comment about a 300KHz switching speed. No-one has made class D amps with that low a switching speed in a very long time 😁

So these comments can be discounted as simply out of date.

Your comment about GaNFETs seems a bit uninformed to me. Its not that GaNFETs are somehow 'the answer' so much as when they started turning up was also about the time that class D got a lot better figured out (and that was ten years ago...).

There's long been a tubes vs solid state debate on the internet, older that the internet itself. All technologies improve in time so one can safely conclude that sooner or later solid state would get good enough that tubes would simply be eclipsed. To tube aficionados like myself this also means that that new technology will eclipse solid state A and AB amplifiers as well.

I cannot speak for other manufacturers, only myself and that should be taken with a grain of salt since I am associated with a manufacturer. I've made no secret that I replaced my triode class A OTL amplifiers with a set of class D amps about two years ago and I don't hear any tradeoffs whatsoever. The class D amps are every bit as good and better in some ways then the OTLs. FWIW, the OTLs have been getting rave reviews and awards in the high end press since sometime in the 1990s.

As a result I'm of the opinion that class D is something to be reckoned with and isn't at all as you described; it dominates what we in the high end audio world call 'mid fi'- stuff you get at Best Buy and the like. Its been making inroads into high end the last 20 years and at this point, seems evolved enough that any manufacturer of amplifiers will be going out on a limb if they don't get class D figured out. Its that simple.

So, if I understand you correctly @mahgister then the idea that the old school separate pre amp and amp approach being "better" would sort of fall under the bigger is better type of logic, as well?

No you did not understand me at all sorry...

I never said that bigger cannot be better, with or without pre-amp...

I never said that upgrading is useless...

I never said that costly design are not often way better...

I said that BEFORE thinking about bigger, upgrades, and costlier options, we must LEARN about acoustical, mechanical and electrical embeddings and also about synergy and optimization (tweaking ) ... We must learn about our own acoustic experience UNDERSTANDING ...

Because beside the "law" of diminushing return there is another principle i name M.A T.S. : minimum acoustic threshold satisfaction...

my own system is under 1000 bucks and i dont need anything more...Not because it is the better , it is not, but it is so well optimized and so well embedded that it put me in sonic heaven...

It takes me years to understand with experiments in a rooom how to embed a system... its pay now... I listen music with a relatively good timbre, with minimal spatial soundfield characteristics definition and actual immersiveness level optimal for the price...

I compute that it will cost me 10,000 bucks to upgrade my satisfying 700 bucks system , nothing less...

I dont need it because lost in music i am able to forget sound without being bothered by any too evident limitations... I called that a rightful embeddings in the three working dimensions for ANY system at ANY price : acoustic, mechanical and electrical...