computer audiophile on the cheap Class D amplifiers, can a chip sound as good as a regular amplifier?

[sockpit]

I had an EP 100.2SE.  Very good.  Used ones are especially good value.  Otherwise they can be had for about half of adverized retail from Walter Liederman at Underwood HiFi.  He owns EP. He may have some used, cause he does trades occasionally,

 

Amp has a huge toroid PS powering a class D module of some sort.  Aesthetics are a bit funky, kind of industrial, but they do th job splendidly.

[tgb]

Hi, 

I received a Classé Sigma 2200i yesteday. Even cold & direct of the seller shop it is top notch SQ. Amazing all-in-one device.

A NAS with music files + a UPNP app on a tablet + the Classé + a pair of speakers, that's it.

A pity that this product has no focus on.

For years, I've spent time & money in various boxes & tweaks & mods etc... From now, no more money & time into tweaks/boxes, but just listening to music thru this 2200i.

Rgds

[Rev Les Crowley]

2 hours ago, tgb said:

Hi, 

I received a Classé Sigma 2200i yesteday. Even cold & direct of the seller shop it is top notch SQ. Amazing all-in-one device.

A NAS with music files + a UPNP app on a tablet + the Classé + a pair of speakers, that's it.

A pity that this product has no focus on.

For years, I've spent time & money in various boxes & tweaks & mods etc... From now, no more money & time into tweaks/boxes, but just listening to music thru this 2200i.

Rgds

Now add some form of digital room correction and ... you'll never care about amps, cables, speakers, DACs, etc again.  (You might start caring a lot more about room treatments, though, as you measure all the terrible things your room does to sound)

[STC]

I remember bass and treble in almost all amplifiers during the golden era and they started to disappear in the 80s and replaced by cables , room treatment and others. 

 

I dont remember ever seeing any kind room treatment or cable talk in the 70s. 

[Rev Les Crowley]

4 minutes ago, STC said:

I remember bass and treble in almost all amplifiers during the golden era and they started to disappear in the 80s and replaced by cables , room treatment and others. 

 

I dont remember ever seeing any kind room treatment or cable talk in the 70s. 

Our local stereo store (shoutout "The Sounding Board" in Ridgewood, now Waldwick, NJ) had studio style acoustic treatments in the listening rooms with the expensive stuff.  YMMV - but treating room acoustics certainly has a bigger payoff than fancy cables or glass cable isolators....

[ARX]

"Cases to impress, technically a pointlessly complicated mess."
This statement is often used by an engineer (PhD Electronics) who has designed amplifier circuits for well known high end brands. One of the mono amplifiers he has worked on will buy you at least 2 Dagostino Momentums.

So much for the bragging.

About 15 years ago, this same person designed a class d amplifier around a no-audio chip, with a price tag of $1000.

While there's no doubt class d technology has progressively evolved over the last 10 years, this amplifier still gives many modern amps a run for their money.

What makes a good amplifier (or any other product) comes down to the initial design and subsequent implementation (quality of parts).

More often than not "less but better" shall apply.

[GUTB]

Pro-class D arguments are always premised on the lie that class D sound just-as or almost-as good as linear amps. The lie is dressed up with audiophile truisms like "part selection", "good design", etc. It's still a lie.

[ARX]

I guess it's no so much about Class D vs. Class A vs. Class A/B etc., but much more about the state of development.

Class D technology is still in it's early stage of development, while Class A (tube or transistor based) has matured.

Similarly to Digital vs. Analog Audio, in the next few years Class D will become at least as good as any other amplifier technology, but more likely: Better.

[ARX]

If you're into nostalgia, or interested to learn about the origin and history of audio (power) amplifiers this list might be of interest.

You'll notice, the design principles I referred to are at least 100 years old.

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, GUTB said:

Pro-class D arguments are always premised on the lie that class D sound just-as or almost-as good as linear amps. The lie is dressed up with audiophile truisms like "part selection", "good design", etc. It's still a lie.

 

Which Class D amps have you heard? 

 

Were any in comparative listening sessions?

[GUTB]

Just now, Ralf11 said:

 

Which Class D amps have you heard? 

 

Were any in comparative listening sessions?

 

I have owned and listened comparatively:

 

Teac AI-301DA (ICE 50ASX2-SE)

D-Sonic M3-600S (Pascal MPRO2)

Technics SG-30U (Technics GaN-FET)

 

I have listened to at shows:

 

Cherry MEGAschino (proprietary?)

Wyred4Sound ST mkII (ICE ASX2)

Mola Mola Kaluga (Ncore 1200)

(other ones I forget right now)

 

Let's admit that amps I heard at shows aren't very good representations. Still, I've heard amps at shows I really liked -- just none of them are class D. 

 

[davide256]

 

1 hour ago, GUTB said:

Pro-class D arguments are always premised on the lie that class D sound just-as or almost-as good as linear amps. The lie is dressed up with audiophile truisms like "part selection", "good design", etc. It's still a lie.

Have you forgotten/not experienced how badly digital sucked for audio before 2010? I buy that class D has its issues, but it appears to be evolving.

[Ralf11]

53 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

I have owned and listened comparatively:

 

Teac AI-301DA (ICE 50ASX2-SE)

D-Sonic M3-600S (Pascal MPRO2)

Technics SG-30U (Technics GaN-FET)

 

I have listened to at shows:

 

Cherry MEGAschino (proprietary?)

Wyred4Sound ST mkII (ICE ASX2)

Mola Mola Kaluga (Ncore 1200)

(other ones I forget right now)

 

Let's admit that amps I heard at shows aren't very good representations. Still, I've heard amps at shows I really liked -- just none of them are class D. 

 

 

at least 2-3 of the above are highly regarded; you might want to try a blind test sometime at home for the bottom section

 

what was wrong with the Technics?

[ARX]

Opinions can be of great personal value, but this value is hopelessly subjective in nature. Opinions generally tell nothing about the object in question, which in this thread is: Class D versus other amplifier topologies.

[Ralf11]

actually, I would give some wt. to opinions

 

the ultimate is a well-controlled study

- below that we might have expert opinion, or clinical experience (for the MDs out there)

 

at the bottom we might have non-expert opinion - but a careful listener (I consider a few people on CA to fit that profile, not that they posted on this thread) can help one decide what to audition in your own system, and to narrow the field

[ARX]

A major underlying factor with regards to audiophoolery, is the infinite number of (mostly subjective) variables.

This, by definition, makes it a non scientific topic, a hobby. 

[elcorso]

4 hours ago, ARX said:

I guess it's no so much about Class D vs. Class A vs. Class A/B etc., but much more about the state of development.

Class D technology is still in it's early stage of development, while Class A (tube or transistor based) has matured.

Similarly to Digital vs. Analog Audio, in the next few years Class D will become at least as good as any other amplifier technology, but more likely: Better.

 

60 years have passed I am still waiting for SS to reach the SQ of the Tubes ...

 

How much more should we expect for class D to reach class AB (forget about class A) ?

First commercial class D amplifier was from 1964 (Sinclair), but the first proposed was in 1958.

 

For my taste, of course...

 

Roch

[Ralf11]

Arcam likes Class G...

 

https://www.arcam.co.uk/ugc/tor/p49/Class G Explained/Class_G_the_ultimate_amplifier_technology_150714_A.pdf

 

[ARX]

Nothing new. 

 

Quote (from AudioHolics) :

 

"Class G & H

Another pair of designs engineered with an eye towards improved efficiency, technically speaking neither Class G nor Class H amplifiers are officially recognized. Instead, they are variations upon the theme of Class A/B, utilizing voltage rail switching and rail modulation respectively. In either case, under low demand conditions, the system utilizes a lower rail voltage than a comparably rated Class A/B amplifier, significantly reducing power consumption; as high power conditions arise, the system dynamically increases rail voltage (i.e. switches to the high voltage rail) to handle high amplitude transients."

 

 

[Ralf11]

yup, Class G is just Class AB with multiple voltage rails for greater efficiency

[ARX]

48 minutes ago, elcorso said:

 

60 years have passed I am still waiting for SS to reach the SQ of the Tubes ...

 

How much more should we expect for class D to reach class AB (forget about class A) ?

First commercial class D amplifier was from 1964 (Sinclair), but the first proposed was in 1958.

 

For my taste, of course...

 

Roch

It's not that SS isn't better than tubes. From a technical point of view they are about equal, with probably a slight edge to SS with regards to linearity/distortion.

The popularity of tube amps is to a great extent due to their often simple and elegant designs, combined with their seductive sound signature (the harmonics). Provided, components of decent quality are used.

[ARX]

Ralf11, that Quote of Bruce Rozenblit in your signature is quite appropriate.

 

One could take this a step further.
I bet many visitors of high end shows would be intrigued by just the plain looks of Dan D'Agostino's products. Some are quite possibly even attracted to these bling bling items. 
This makes me, as well as smart Dan, grinn.

 

When I first saw these amplifiers, I thought: "there must be tubes inside", because I could think of no other purpose for the Rolex in the front panel than to display high voltage/heater current. In tube amplifiers with fixed bias a meter is often used to adjust the plate current.

It appeared, these are solid state amps. The Rolex is purely cosmetic and completely superfluous.
Looking at the internals, I spot components worth roughly $1000, probably much less. The machined exterior won't be cheap, assume 300-500.

So, Dan builds a decent amplifier in bling bling package that costs $1500 without overhead, distribution etc.
These are then sold by selected dealers for $40.000 each. This is not uncommon in the high end business and I won't pass judgement on these practices.

 

By the way, for those who are unaware of this designer, Dan used to manufacture "Krell" products.

Overly complicated, mediocre and sterile sounding products sold at high prices, which as soon as they break down turn out to be a money pit (once more).

[Ralf11]

my sig. has angered many trolls - I bet few of them know who Bruce R. is or can tell an electron from a unicorn...

 

but I have no problem with buying for D'Agostino type looks or any other aesthetic reason - I like the D'Agostino look but would not pay for it.

 

I was sorry tho to see the lack of posts on a thread where a couple of women (Thereasa was one IIRC) were posting about design & aesthetics.

 

I'd pick ergonomics over simply looks tho - in fact, one reason I like my ARC LS25 Mk II pre-amp is just the knobs and switches.  But not the only reason, I listened pretty carefully to it when I got it.  My Sonic Frontiers Line One was laid up in an (incompetent) repair shop then, but I have it back now, and will compare the two units, once I finish my el cheap roller ball tests, different DACs & resistors in/out on my 3.7i Maggies...  could be a while...

 

I also plan to replace my Class G Sunfire amp (Bob Carver design) with a Class D item.

[ARX]

Many years ago, in a double blind test between a $700 Ah! Njoe Tjoeb CD player (basically a cheapo Marantz with an upgraded clock and tube output stage) and a $60.000 Krell CDP, nearly every participant preferred the Ah! to the Krell...

[Jud]

10 hours ago, ARX said:

Many years ago, in a double blind test between a $700 Ah! Njoe Tjoeb CD player (basically a cheapo Marantz with an upgraded clock and tube output stage) and a $60.000 Krell CDP, nearly every participant preferred the Ah! to the Krell...

 

And we know how effective blind tests are for audio, so (expensive audio jewelry) case closed!