Popular Post tmtomh Posted May 1, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted May 1, 2017 Honestly, I don't feel that @GUTB is trolling - or to put it another way, I have no idea what GUTB's true motivation was in starting this thread, but I found the content of the OP to be interesting and not trolling. I'm not replacing my admittedly not high-end, but still great-sounding Nelson Pass-designed Adcom MOSFET power amp with a Class D amp in my main system anytime soon. And I do believe that as of now, a well-designed Class A or AB power amp is going to beat out most if not all Class D amps in critical listening. But I am open-minded about the future of Class D and would love to see much faster-switching technology or other improvements come online to enable more accurate amplification with the low cost, small form factor, and low-heat benefits of Class D. I think the "Class D for the mid/woofers and Class A for the tweeters" approach of the KEF LS50 actives probably has a lot of legs, given the raves those speakers have gotten and the intuitive way it makes sense. In this respect I found Levinson's comment on-target when he talked about A/D hybridization. (Although as usual I found his comment arrogant and of little value otherwise.) And I found Nelson Pass' comment not so much "diplomatic," but rather emblematic of his down-to-earth, open-minded, unpretentious attitude: He's basically saying that he doesn't necessarily agree that Class D is definitionally bad. Rather, he seems to think it might be susceptible to major improvement as the market matures and Class D designers' attitudes and incentives mature with it. I always find his modesty refreshing. watercourse and jabbr 2 Link to comment
Popular Post tmtomh Posted January 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 7, 2019 5 minutes ago, sandyk said: Yet once again you are claiming that the high res formats including DSD are a waste of time . That is not the experience of a large number of C.A. members and huge numbers of people worldwide. Just because you personally are unable to hear the benefit of the high resolution formats including DSD, doesn't mean that others can't. You are seriously misrepresenting both @March Audio's point, and the experience of large numbers of CA members. I, like many CA members, listen to and enjoy SACDs. And I - also like many CA members, I would guess - am not ready to dismiss 48kHz sample-rate files out of hand compared to Redbook 44.1kHz, because the former affords a larger buffer for filtering, reducing or eliminating linearity vs phase trade-offs in the audible range. But that doesn't mean that I, or many other CA members, think that we can hear above 20kHz (or 15-18kHz for most of us). Nor does it mean we believe that ultrasonics impact what music in the audible range sounds like (unless the ultrasonics are unfiltered and cause our audio equipment to manifest distortion in the audible range as a result). So by equating "we cannot directly hear 55kHz" with "DSD is a waste of time," you are illustrating your own ignorance and nothing more. March Audio and kumakuma 1 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now