15 folks total with actual experience 60% say they love them 40% say they don't prefer them. Hmmm, then I would suggest looking at the system profiles/tastes of those two groups, to ee if there is something that's unique to each group which cause them to feel how they do. Also, keep in mind that age may being playing a factor for the opinions of each group. Just some thoughts. Damn, I hope my math is right. Back to listening to my Class D intergrated amp/VPI Aries3/Classic 3 tonearm/SDS/ATVM540ML. M~
I totally forgot about Khozmo! I nearly bought one of the preamps when I was living in Germany. Nice looking stuff for sure.
--Different people have different tastes/sonic priorities. --in 2020 if you spend enough money you can get a class A (A/B?) solid state amp with the "tube virtues" many like. Advancements in technology/time/money solve many problems. The only gauge is how it sounds. --I'm returning to high end after decades away and thought that if I wanted to get a certain sound I'm used to (in my mirage M3 bipoles) I'd have to get an omni/dipole/open baffle speaker. However I accidentally found a bookshelf speaker (LSA 10 signature) which disappears the way my M3s do.
I'm very happy with my Khozmo, it replaced the tubes I was using with my Quartets. I wish I had a conservatory though!
Loved my Panasonic XR55 receiver driving Paradigms. Someone on AVS forum was driving B&W Diamonds with them about 15 years ago But sound is all about being in love
I'm using an XR50 in my HT. 5.1 is fine for me and it sounded better than the Yamaha I tried to replace it with. I don't need a new amp for my main system, but if I ever do, class D will be highly considered.
Well, I do not think that the break in is over--hard to tell if you do not have a way to really know--something you can compare it to. But, it sounds very nice (with the SA-10) right now. However, I really only have about 40-60 actual hours on the PM-10 and about 30 hours on the SA-10 so I suppose it will take substantially more to get it sounding its best.
There is no reason a competitive class D amp has to be more expensive, and many reasons why they can be cheaper! This isn't quite correct. Like any technology there is a learning/innovation curve and we're still on the steeper part of that curve. But in a nutshell the analogy doesn't hold up. They are now at the point where they are completely competitive with conventional class AB amps. Like anything, some are great, some suck and some are in-between. The later amps employing GaNFETs are the place to look. They have less deadtime due to the higher speed of the output devices and so have less distortion. We still argue about tubes vs solid state on these forums so I wouldn't regard that as an effective indicator. I've heard some class D amps that were quite impressive and sounding very much like a very neutral high quality tube amplifier, and others that an average tube amp could eat for breakfast without burping. Generally, the older amps are less figured out as they use slower output devices, greater deadtime and slower switching speeds. If y'all have been reading Bruno Putzeys (that head of the class article is pretty old) then you know that he is very interested in self-oscillating circuits. The idea here is that the circuit has so much feedback that it goes into oscillation (the switching frequency). This allows very high feedback values, over 35-40dB, which is getting in the range where the feedback can actually compensate for the distortion that it otherwise adds (which BTW is why so many solid state amps sound bright and harsh). Getting the higher ordered harmonics down is pretty important if you want smooth sound, and its not easy because the human ear uses the higher orders to sense sound pressure and so is keenly sensitive to their presence (that's why an amp can have 0.005% THD and still be bright)! By running feedback levels this high, its possible to get the higher ordered harmonic generation down considerably- allowing for a 'neutral' sounding amp that isn't harsh or bright. Developing this kind of gain (in excess of 70dB, since 25-35 is needed for voltage gain when the amp is operating closed loop) is a trick with conventional approaches! That is likely where class D is going, and why its a big deal because you need to run that kind of feedback if you're going to run it at all.
IDK, the analogy seems fitting to me when Bruno Putzey states, " Modern Class D amps, in particular mine—ahem—sound good not because they’re Class D, but in spite of it. I can’t repeat that often enough. Left to its own devices, a switching power stage tries to do just about anything except amplify audio." Though I realize you amp manufacturers love the margins class D can offer.
Just to be clear my company makes tube amps. But we've been investigating class D for some time, and even have a patent in the field. I get what Bruno is saying there- switching circuits can be quite unruly! But if you keep your ducks in a row they can perform quite nicely- and by that I mean keep up with a good tube or solid state amp.
From what I have seen Class D is getting better. Might be a little while before we can buy a Class D integrated with numbers like a Class D Benchmark Monoblock for low cost though...
You mean a class AB Benchmark? There are a couple out there that at least measure nearly as well. I should confess that I'm really nitpicking when it comes to the best class D I've heard. The best ones can perform well enough for most listeners, just not at prices I'd be willing to pay, especially considering the production cost savings are not being passed on to the consumer in many cases. There are a couple, like the XTZ Edge A2-300, that I might consider if my budget was <$1K Your current amps seem to be reasonably priced. I wish you the best in your Class D endeavors.
Have you had a Class D amplifier for a period of time before? I.e not a demo in a shop or Audio fair? Just wondering.
I’ve been listening to a relatively cheap 250w 8 ohms Class D Dual Mono stereo power amplifier for over a week and I am very impressed. I have no need to change back to my main setup atm as I’m very happy with the output from the power amp via a passive pre, a CDP with variable output and a normal Exposure preamp and the results to me are positive. It’s just another amplifier. Take away the Class D tag and it’ll be more than acceptable. And, apparently it uses A LOT LESS POWER than Class A, AB/ etc, a lot less.
Had a Hypex nCore amp for a few months and it seemed no way 'digital' or glary sounding. For better or worse, all it ever sounded like it was doing (we're talking perception) was amplifying the signal, in the purest sense of the word. Nothing added. And no compression as volume increased. Some things could sound simply stunning, but in the end I wanted a bit more bloom on things that didn't - usually things less well recorded. Went to a (more expensive) A/B amp which got closer; but eventually ended up with a class A amp which is really hitting the spot. In fact the amps got progressively worse-measuring...! That said I've heard more far difference between different A/B amps than I did between the nCore vs A/B example above. In other words it doesn't hold to say one is inherently going to be better than the other. Where the nCore does stand out is producing all that clean, effortless power in such a small, cool-running and affordable package. Surely the answer for some. To the OP - definitely try some Class A options if possible though; not least given sensitive speakers.
Was it a common trait between the amps that you didn’t like or something else? I don’t really subscribe to the assertion that the class of amplification is important. It’s the implementation that matters most, not if it is Class A, ClassAB etc. The only amplifier I remember owning that had the Class of amplifier stated on the front was a Audio Note Oto SE Phono. I do remember seeing Technics amplifiers had Class AA stamped prominently mid to late 80’s, apologies for my very patchy memory. At least you’ve heard them over a period of time to have a informed opinion, many don’t. At the grand old age of nearly 51 I might be going deaf so I’d still recommend demo first if at all possible. As I’ve said before I will be keeping my existing setup as I prefer it which is no slight on the Hattor Power amp/Khozmo preamp. A demo in a shop is not the best way to judge them, you need them at home for at least a week. I’m still happy, do these burn in’? I’ve put a good few hours on the pair.
Common trait? - not really, other than each move gave a bit more visceral bloom to the music. Again though the nCore had some great sound qualities of its own.
Absolutely right! Commercial cylinder records and perfected machines to play them first emerged in the 1890s, and many of them are still going strong today. Everything since then has been downhill. Oh, and please note: the geometric shape of a cylinder record is--a tube! OK, smart-rumped kidding aside, I, too, had McIntosh for years--not one of the more in-demand models (2100 power amp), but driving a pair of old Magnepans it gave me many hours of listening pleasure. Then I heard an early Tripath amp. It was love at first hearing. Early this year, I finally got lucky enough to land the amp I'd been seeking for several years, a Bel Canto eVo2i (Gen II), which is a powerful Tripath design, and I love it. Absolutely love it. Now, admittedly, relative to the "golden ears" crowd mine are probably more like pyrite--I'm not kidding about being into cylinders--but after living with it for a few months I have no complaints at all. It does exactly what I had hoped, and it does it well. I can't speak to more recent designs (the Bel Canto is about a decade old, now), but what I can say is that people who own the eVo2i must like it, as here in the US these amps almost never come up for sale on sites like US Audio Mart or Audiogon, ditto eBay, and I've never seen one for sale on Craigslist. When they do appear, they usually are offered at pretty elevated price tags for a 10-year-old piece of gear by a manufacturer better known to audio buffs than to the general public. The Tripath amps I've owned (and I've had a few, mostly of the very low cost persuasion like the Trends 10.1) do sound different from more conventional designs. Whether you like the difference is a matter of what you want out of your listening. What I like is the uncanny definition of the sound, the sense of instruments firmly and distinctly painted in space, of voices as individuals, whether in stereo or in an older mono recording. For my kind of listening, nearly all classical and heavy on chamber/solo instrumental music, with a strong admixture of orchestral and some choral/opera, that virtue is tremendously appealing. For those who prefer a more "blended" sound, it would not be, and it definitely wouldn't be for those whose preference is "warm" more than "clean." Nobody is "wrong" in any of this, except to the extent of trying to dismiss any topology, old or new, as "inferior" for all kinds of listeners when in fact, to paraphrase one of my professors from years back, "When reasonable ears can differ, count on it." (I suppose I should add, in passing, that I had a Rogue Sphynx first edition for a while and liked it; I took the relatively rare opportunity to buy my Bel Canto when the Rogue for some reason gave up the ghost.) My apologies for belated contribution to the discussion, thereby messing up all those nice "95% of all doctors surveyed prefer Tums" calculations upstream.
