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

[GUTB]

1 minute ago, Silly goose said:

Bob Carver was a great engineer from an era long past. That era was called the "Industrial Age". Since then, we have moved into a new era called the "information age". In this age bright minds such Bruno Putzeys lead the way, and class D is now king. Older audiophiles may never accept this reality. Simply for nostalgic reasons alone. Modern music lovers use solar power to heat their listening rooms, and class D for music amplification. Lucky bunch these days as they get to take advantage of the highest fidelity we have ever experienced yet in the history of audio amplification. 

 

So, what amps have you listened to that you can recommend?

[Silly goose]

1 minute ago, GUTB said:

 

So, what amps have you listened to that you can recommend?

Scroll back in the thread. 

[GUTB]

5 minutes ago, Silly goose said:

Scroll back in the thread. 

 

'You didn't name any amps. You named several class D modules.

 

So, are you ready to just admit that you actually haven't listened to amps, and at best your experience comes from DIY products?

[Silly goose]

15 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

'You didn't name any amps. You named several class D modules.

 

So, are you ready to just admit that you actually haven't listened to amps, and at best your experience comes from DIY products?

Most of the amps I listed are commercial units not available to the DIY market. I've heard 100's of finished commercial amps. But I'm more interested in what's in the case, not what the nameplate says. There's only a small handful of good class D manufacturers. The only differences between the end products made for the audiophile market is the voicing. Personally I don't like voiced amps. I like hearing only the music, not the amps. Any amp which has sound characteristics that can be discribed using audiophile terminology, is a poor amp as far as I'm concerned. 

[Jud]

2 hours ago, GUTB said:

 

So, what amps have you listened to that you can recommend?

 

You might have a listen to the Mola Mola Kaluga amps.  But they are in the $15-20,000 range.  What price range are you looking at?

[Miko]

That's rough!! I will say the old man hasn't stopped. He's building beautiful tube amps now, but in his day and up till quite recently (when he sold Sunfire) he was still putting out the solid state goods.

 

He hinted at a new digital amp he was working on but I think he didn't develop it. Some of that technology went into the SRA-2700EQ amplifier for the Subrosa Flat Panel Subwoofer (of which I have two) 

 

Thats a 2,700 watt monoblock with a 1 rack height. Drives my 'rosa's more then enough with the gain set at 0db. 

 

Feast your eyeballs on 5,400 watts of orgasmic sub-atomic p o w e r!!!

 

[GUTB]

3 hours ago, Jud said:

 

You might have a listen to the Mola Mola Kaluga amps.  But they are in the $15-20,000 range.  What price range are you looking at?

 

10k at a stretch. So something like the Kaluga only if I get one used.

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't WANT to have a 100 lbs block of aluminum. But, sonics is paramount.

[Jud]

35 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

10k at a stretch. So something like the Kaluga only if I get one used.

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't WANT to have a 100 lbs block of aluminum. But, sonics is paramount.

 

So then you'll want to try to get to the Sonore room at a show if barrows is providing his amp that uses nCore modules.  It'll give you some flavor of the sound of amps like the NORD at around $1500 (not 15,000) for the stereo model and not a huge amount more for a mono pair.

[GUTB]

8 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

So then you'll want to try to get to the Sonore room at a show if barrows is providing his amp that uses nCore modules.  It'll give you some flavor of the sound of amps like the NORD at around $1500 (not 15,000) for the stereo model and not a huge amount more for a mono pair.

 

Thank you I'll give them a listen. I'm going to AXPONA.

 

Are you going to Munich Hi-End?

[bigbob]

10 hours ago, Supperconductor said:

What's most enticing to me is a little DIY here, a little off the shelf there, a little EQ/DSP with playback software - this hobby is supposed to be fun. IMHO it can be a heckuva LOT more fun if you don't have to spend a lot of money for it.

 

In many respects, being on a limited budget makes you appreciate what a GREAT SQ you can achieve with limited resources. Little tweaks are the heart of a "Computer Audiophile on the Cheap", whether it is tip-toes under the speaker and amp for isolation, to the HFC MC-0.5 magnetizing the electrical supply--even the Shakti inlines on my interconnects.

 

For years, I WISHED that someday I could afford a really excellent system. And now I am amazed at the sound my little rig yields. The tweaks all are under a $100, basically the least amount for the biggest impact is the goal.

 

Sure the Schiit Modi 2 is the entry level--but why is necessary to point out that is the bottom of the line? Obviously we know the Bifrost is 4 times more expensive, and the Yggy is 20 times more expensive. Surely they are better, for more money. If you have limited funds--then you work within the parameters.

 

The engineers at Mercedes Benz decided to produce the Maybach-- and quit trying to sell them in 2012-- because only a few despots and oil sheiks could afford them. Bottom line, they both had Mercedes engines--just like the "entry level" sedan, and they got you from point A to B.

 

An entry level car is like an entry-level stereo...

[Jud]

11 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

Thank you I'll give them a listen. I'm going to AXPONA.

 

Are you going to Munich Hi-End?

 

European vacations aren't on the schedule for at least some years, as my wife's just retired and we're in the process of building and moving to a new home.

[Silly goose]

26 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

So then you'll want to try to get to the Sonore room at a show if barrows is providing his amp that uses nCore modules.  It'll give you some flavor of the sound of amps like the NORD at around $1500 (not 15,000) for the stereo model and not a huge amount more for a mono pair.

Yes and the best thing about the Nord is, since your best pal Blizzard designed the Nord one-up, you can sleep easy knowing you're supporting his designs. 

[Miko]

I've listened to my share of mega buck systems. A bunch of guys I race motorcycle with are engineer's and what not for the big three. (I live in Michigan) so I've had a chance to "cross hobby" with a couple.

 

For the most part, they don't really know how to set up systems to sound the best. They are of the mindset that because it costs $xx,xxx it automatically sounds good.

 

Speakers placed for maximum "waf"  etc... I don't bother trying and I've learned the importance of set up. So.. in the right hands.. even a low budget system can produce outstanding sound.

 

I pick out top quality stuff when I can, usually used.. and spend an inordinate about of time setting it up.  For those who are interested, Jim Smith write a book and DVD called "Get Better Sound" I have them and recommend them.

[Silly goose]

1 hour ago, Miko said:

That's rough!! I will say the old man hasn't stopped. He's building beautiful tube amps now, but in his day and up till quite recently (when he sold Sunfire) he was still putting out the solid state goods.

 

He hinted at a new digital amp he was working on but I think he didn't develop it. Some of that technology went into the SRA-2700EQ amplifier for the Subrosa Flat Panel Subwoofer (of which I have two) 

 

Thats a 2,700 watt monoblock with a 1 rack height. Drives my 'rosa's more then enough with the gain set at 0db. 

 

Feast your eyeballs on 5,400 watts of orgasmic sub-atomic p o w e r!!!

 

Yes Bob Carver is brilliant. But he went back to tubes because that's where the money is. Good luck selling class D monoblocks for $32000 a pair. 

[bigbob]

8 hours ago, Silly goose said:

I don't think that was a very good reference point for class D. But if your amp budget maxes out at $50, might be better off sticking to the pawnshops. 

 

FINALLY, you Silly Goose.....

The entire point of my experiment was to find out what was the sound of a $40 "exploitation" of the TPA3116D2, before investing 10 times that amount on a "audiophile" build by FleaWatt. I am still intrigued by the possibility of Class-D, but after all the hullabaloo, the old Harman/Kardon still sounds better in the $50-class of receiver/amp...

If I had a $1500 budget for testing my theories, maybe my results would be different.

[Silly goose]

3 minutes ago, bigbob said:

 

FINALLY, you Silly Goose.....

The entire point of my experiment was to find out what was the sound of a $40 "exploitation" of the TPA3116D2, before investing 10 times that amount on a "audiophile" build by FleaWatt. I am still intrigued by the possibility of Class-D, but after all the hullabaloo, the old Harman/Kardon still sounds better in the $50-class of receiver/amp...

If I had a $1500 budget for testing my theories, maybe my results would be different.

Don't bother with flea watt. Buy from this guy. Nobody is building better TI chip based amps. Made in Germany. And he's a perfectionist. The 3255 is the latest and best. 

 

http://www.360customs.de/en/2016/10/tpa3255-tpa3251-tpa3245-universal-one-for-all/

[Ralf11]

10 hours ago, Miko said:

 

I myself will stick to big, muti tube behemoths and enjoy the warm (air) and glow of thirty 6550's

 

 

BUT WHAT WILL YOU DO IN THE SUMMER?

[unbalanced output]

On 15/04/2017 at 7:10 PM, Jud said:

 

Your understanding is inadequate.

 

*All* amp topologies have inherent advantages and disadvantages.  The design problem with each is of course to maximize the advantages and minimize the disadvantages within whatever specific constraints exist on the project.  jabbr understands this well, as do most other people following the thread: Note he said making a really good SPMS involves more than a simple circuit, not that it is impossible.  And when you do make a really good one, that stuff about switching noise artifacts becomes nonsense.  You won't hear switching noise or any other artifacts 128dB down.

 

It's also a fact that people hear differently.  At the price levels BigBob is talking about, careful choices about what to look for and buy and what things do and do not bother you must be made. That's what is so interesting about his journey - to understand his particular exploration of the *many* ways, not just one, we can hear music that moves us.

 

Hi Jud, you may be correct but the fact that the theorethical S/N ratio is 128 dB does not mean that the switching noise is -128 dB. The switching noise is very high frequency (not audible) and is filtered at the output. The circuit noise is typically minimised by a feedback loop in this kind of amp. What GUTB means is probably distortion cause by the switching inaccuracies which is unavoidable for a pwm circuit due to jitter and other effects. 

[Ralf11]

what about the IQ M300 mono blocks?

[GUTB]

When I talk about "artifacts", I mean byproducts from the PWM process, which includes things like distortion from the sine-to-square-to-sine conversion process, and also effects caused by output filtering techniques.

 

Class D amplification is a very high-level technical subject that frankly goes over my head once you go deeper past just the fundamentals. However, my understanding is enough to know that: Class D is mathematically, physically inferior to a Class A. What goes into the amplifier is NOT what comes out. FACT.

 

Now, a lot of hi-fi has nothing to do with "high fidelity", and more to do with coloration, distortion effects, and so on. It's like a form of art rather than pure science, because of all the phenomena involved is not fully understood. So, there is no reason why Class D still can't sound "good", even if it is technically inferior to Class A. Right now, the body of consensus / research indicates that the artifacts left over by the PWM process is un-pleasing to listeners, a fact that is besides the issue of Class D being inferior to Class A. I have read that this probably won't change until technology exists to move the switching frequency much higher (around 5GHz if I recall) -- the reason for this goes over my head, something to do with output filtering I think.

 

Other people have reported that the use of a linear power supply improves Class D performance. Not everyone shares that opinion though.

[Miko]

IIRC it was based on the fact that they cannot get the transistors to switch quickly enough and the filtering is causing unwanted harmonics that may not be measurable, but can be heard. 

 

This has been the trouble with class D going back many decades. This is not a new idea. The first was back in the early 60's Sinclair Radionics.... I'm sure with enough money thrown at it, it can become a viable technology but why? It's a niche market at best in home audio and most audiophiles want SET or pure class A. Nelson Pass makes a tidy living selling mega buck and mega heavy class A amps..

[Miko]

3 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

 

 

BUT WHAT WILL YOU DO IN THE SUMMER?

 

Sweat is good for the soul!

[Silly goose]

16 minutes ago, Miko said:

It's a niche market at best in home audio and most audiophiles want SET or pure class A. Nelson Pass makes a tidy living selling mega buck and mega heavy class A amps..

Yes when all you care about is the casework, weight, and brand name, class D doesn't make much sense. Take them for all they're worth since they don't know any better anyways. You can't take all that money with you to the grave, so might as well blow it all while you're still living. Your kids won't need much inheritance anyways because they will buy systems that sound 10x better for 10x less cost if they're into audio.  

[esldude]

39 minutes ago, GUTB said:

When I talk about "artifacts", I mean byproducts from the PWM process, which includes things like distortion from the sine-to-square-to-sine conversion process, and also effects caused by output filtering techniques.

 

Class D amplification is a very high-level technical subject that frankly goes over my head once you go deeper past just the fundamentals. However, my understanding is enough to know that: Class D is mathematically, physically inferior to a Class A. What goes into the amplifier is NOT what comes out. FACT.

 

Now, a lot of hi-fi has nothing to do with "high fidelity", and more to do with coloration, distortion effects, and so on. It's like a form of art rather than pure science, because of all the phenomena involved is not fully understood. So, there is no reason why Class D still can't sound "good", even if it is technically inferior to Class A. Right now, the body of consensus / research indicates that the artifacts left over by the PWM process is un-pleasing to listeners, a fact that is besides the issue of Class D being inferior to Class A. I have read that this probably won't change until technology exists to move the switching frequency much higher (around 5GHz if I recall) -- the reason for this goes over my head, something to do with output filtering I think.

 

Other people have reported that the use of a linear power supply improves Class D performance. Not everyone shares that opinion though.

No, I am sorry, your facts are not  actually facts.  Switching amps are more complex than other designs yes.  They have things that have to be carefully managed yes.  That does not equate to them being physically and mathematically inferior to class A.  In fact, the very neatness of the design is that it sidesteps some fundamental issues of class A and AB designs.  What goes into the amplifier can indeed be so very close to what comes out in the better designs that conventional designs for other reasons have difficulty matching that result.   

 

I could say class A designs are inherently flawed.  Mathematical and physical fact because none of them can produce a straight transfer function.  They are always curved and inherently have some level of distortion.  The only way to fix that is a design running off of an infinitely large voltage which we know is impossible.  Therefore class A is inherently no good.  That would be a foolish conclusion. 

 

You need to manage distortion in all its various forms so it falls below what can be heard.  Once you do that, they would all sound the same. That actually turns out to be very hard to do because loudspeaker loads interact with the amplifiers in complex ways regardless of the class of operation.

[GUTB]

50 minutes ago, esldude said:

No, I am sorry, your facts are not  actually facts.  Switching amps are more complex than other designs yes.  They have things that have to be carefully managed yes.  That does not equate to them being physically and mathematically inferior to class A.  In fact, the very neatness of the design is that it sidesteps some fundamental issues of class A and AB designs.  What goes into the amplifier can indeed be so very close to what comes out in the better designs that conventional designs for other reasons have difficulty matching that result.   

 

I could say class A designs are inherently flawed.  Mathematical and physical fact because none of them can produce a straight transfer function.  They are always curved and inherently have some level of distortion.  The only way to fix that is a design running off of an infinitely large voltage which we know is impossible.  Therefore class A is inherently no good.  That would be a foolish conclusion. 

 

You need to manage distortion in all its various forms so it falls below what can be heard.  Once you do that, they would all sound the same. That actually turns out to be very hard to do because loudspeaker loads interact with the amplifiers in complex ways regardless of the class of operation.

 

Class D operates by transforming a sine wave into a square wave (and other variations?) and back again to a sine wave. That conversion process results in the signal coming out of the amp being different than the signal which goes in -- FACT. Immutable, carved-in-stone, ultra hardcore FACT. Additionally, the amp has to filter the output so the speakers don't go bonkers, and that filtering represents a LARGE challenge to getting good sound out of class D.

 

The problem with class A is that it amplifies the input signal, along with all the other stuff that shouldn't be amplified. However, the challenge of managing the unwanted artifacts in a class A design is much, much easier and more-or-less a solved problem (with just incremental evolution of better designs coming forward).