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

[davide256]

12 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...

That would be an easy test to bias the outcome... just pick bright speakers with no bass.

[ARX]

A pair of Wilson Tiny Tots? ?

[ARX]

Obviously, such tests can easily be manipulated, but what would be point in the long run?

 

There are many factors at play within a complete system that contribute to the actual listening experience which make fair, let alone objective comparisons between components very hard, if not impossible.

This leaves us with measurements of individual components in order to assess performance. 

[ARX]

Try to get proper sound from a pair of ATC monitors driven by an Audio Note SET amplifier....

This doesn't imply both the speakers, as well as the amp are bad products.

 

Nevertheless, with CD players being source components, a MOR setup of decent quality should allow for a reasonably fair assessment based on listening.

 

 

[Jud]

9 minutes ago, ARX said:

Obviously, such tests can easily be manipulated, but what would be point in the long run?

 

There are many factors at play within a complete system that contribute to the actual listening experience which make a fair, let alone objective comparisons between components very hard, if not impossible. This leaves us with measurements of individual components. 

 

Many factors at play not only within the system, but within us.

 

We can measure individual components, and (less often) we measure behavior of components within systems.

 

Simulation of how various items in the circuit interact within a component is done as a matter of course (and isn't always 100% effective at predicting the outcome in real world conditions).  I don't know that simulations are ever run (or are even possible) for interactions between the various components in an audio system in real world environments.

[ARX]

Simulations of (many) components to predict and manipulate a possible outcome (response in a certain room, area, etc.)? 
Yes, this is common practice in the Pro Audio world.

Simulation of interaction within (many) electrical circuits between (many) individual components on a R&D level should theoretically be possible, but I guess it would be very complicated to setup.

[Ron Scubadiver]

13 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...

This reminds me of the so called folding chair test.  One system was a consumer Bluray player connected to a Behringer A500 amp with a $5 2 meter RCA interconnect and sitting on a folding chair.  The other system was a $12,000 stack of audiophile gear on a sturdy rack.  A third of the subjects could not give a preference and slightly more than a third preferred the folding chair system.  In general, blind tests turn out this way.  Even when there is a statistically significant ability to differentiate A from B, there is usually no preference or agreement that one is superior to the other.  Note the A500 sells for $200 in the USA.  It lacks turn on relays, so no free lunch.

 

My other favorite is the Gain Card amplifier which sold for $3000 and contained $150 of parts including amplifier modules intended to go into consumer audio gear.

 

It's no wonder home theater builders are using Crown Drive Core amps by the ton and have clients in $2 million homes satisfied with these expensive installations.

[ARX]

This illustrates fundamentally very few things have changed over the past 100 years.

These days many people use pro audio gear (amps, loudspeaker drivers etc.) at home. 
Esoterics use 80 year old pro audio technology > WE, Silbatone, G.I.P. etc.

[ARX]

Once you dive a little deeper into the technology and look beyond the case/label, you'll discover a wealth of opportunities that won't break the bank, but could please your ears.

[Panelhead]

20 hours 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. 

 

  I thought you had purchased a Crown XLS-2502. I have a couple of the other models. Not as good as a well built linear, paid less than 300.00 for a XLS-2000 that is 650 Watts per side. If used balanced in and Speakon out it is not bad. The output filter maybe the weak link here.

[GUTB]

1 hour ago, Panelhead said:

  I thought you had purchased a Crown XLS-2502. I have a couple of the other models. Not as good as a well built linear, paid less than 300.00 for a XLS-2000 that is 650 Watts per side. If used balanced in and Speakon out it is not bad. The output filter maybe the weak link here.

 

You're right I did have the Crown. It was God-awful and just a step above the Teac which was unlistenable.

[GUTB]

Tubes are better than silicon. Why? I think it just boils down to vacuum being a better transmission medium than silicon (which is a super complex topic but basically the medium is semi-gas carrier molecules).

 

However modern speaker applications largely fall outside the tube's performance envelop. Low impedance swings and small drivers. But if you're willing to pay the price tubes are still best.

[Jud]

4 hours ago, ARX said:

Simulations of (many) components to predict and manipulate a possible outcome (response in a certain room, area, etc.)? 
Yes, this is common practice in the Pro Audio world.

Simulation of interaction within (many) electrical circuits between (many) individual components on a R&D level should theoretically be possible, but I guess it would be very complicated to setup.

 

Yes, it was the latter I was referring to.

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, GUTB said:

Tubes are better than silicon. Why? I think it just boils down to vacuum being a better transmission medium than silicon (which is a super complex topic but basically the medium is semi-gas carrier molecules).

 

However modern speaker applications largely fall outside the tube's performance envelop. Low impedance swings and small drivers. But if you're willing to pay the price tubes are still best.

 

this may be the worst post ever - why not take an electronics course?

[GUTB]

28 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

this may be the worst post ever - why not take an electronics course?

 

The post is truthful. The problem is your emotionally-skewed preconceptions.

[mansr]

11 minutes ago, GUTB said:

The post is truthful.

I think you mean post-truthful.

[GUTB]

2 minutes ago, mansr said:

I think you mean post-truthful.

 

No, it means truthful in the neurotypical sense.

 

If someone knows differently, please educate me. Of course no one will.

[mansr]

3 minutes ago, GUTB said:

If someone knows differently, please educate me. Of course no one will.

Try your local college. I'm sure they'll be happy to help.

[Ralf11]

9 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

No, it means truthful in the neurotypical sense.

 

If someone knows differently, please educate me. Of course no one will.

 

a local community college will have courses for a very reasonable fee; or try an elementary book on the topic

 

you mis-understandings are so fundamental that this forum can't help you

[Ron Scubadiver]

neu·ro·typ·i·cal

ˌn(y)o͝orōˈtipikəl/

adjective

adjective: neurotypical; adjective: neuro-typical

1. not displaying or characterized by autistic or other neurologically atypical patterns of thought or behavior.

   "neurotypical individuals often assume that their experience of the world is either the only one or the only correct one"

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

On 5/24/2018 at 6:51 AM, Ralf11 said:

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

 

http://training.cochrane.org/path/grade-approach-evaluating-quality-evidence-pathway

 

12 hours ago, Jud said:

 

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

 

+1

[ARX]

This is a nice introduction to electronics...

How about returning to Class D?

[elcorso]

On 5/23/2018 at 5:40 PM, ARX said:

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.

 

Honestly, I don't care about measurements (linearity/distortion), my only need is to please my ears, not yours or those of others.

 

The elegance of the design could be important to me, if the first thing I mentioned is accomplished. But I've had horrible tube amps in sight, but who cares? I almost always listen in the dark and I did not buy them to impress anyone.

 

Leaving this thread now,

 

Roch

[ARX]

1 hour ago, elcorso said:

 

The elegance of the design could be important to me, if the first thing I mentioned is accomplished. But I've had horrible tube amps in sight, but who cares? I almost always listen in the dark and I did not buy them to impress anyone.

 

 

 

I didn't refer to the "looks" of the amplifier, but rather the internals > the design of the circuit, layout etc.

Evidently, this often results in a "form follows function" type of esthetics and more important: better sound.

Admitted, my statement was confusing.

[sandyk]

On ‎4‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 1:45 PM, Silly goose said:

As far as I'm concerned, anything but class D is only fit for boat anchors these days.

 

 Living up to your User Name ?

 

 The Alternate Universe GUTB perhaps ?