Class D is still not as good in 2024?
- Thread starter Analogous
- Start date
reignofchaos
Well-Known Member
You basically put it in my order of preference if these are the OEM modules.
spirovious
Well-Known Member
Not compared directly but had pleasent sound quality.
Yelamanchili manohar
Well-Known Member
I cant have a AC in my room due to wrong plumbing by the builders sub contractor. And my main line power for the entire room is limited to 13 amps. Sitting in that room, with any of the tube amps running, means stripping into my undies before I get to even flip my first LP. Not exactly audio seduction, but it will get anyone naked soon enough.
Class D is definitely for me
Class D is definitely for me
Then there are Pascal Modules, Gan Fet etc. etc. Very difficult to definitively say one is better imo at-least until one has heard them all. If one goes by reviews then Red Dragon - Pascal, AGD Gan Fet etc. etc., from $2000 to $20,000 all sound excellent. FWIW I am going to make an effort to audition the AGD amps. And I am also highly interested in the Atmasphere amps. as well. Some have stated that they are the closest approximation of tube signature and of-course Atmasphere is a giant in the tube world. And ultimately like everything else I think system synergy definitely plays a huge role, as to how these would sound - pre-amp, source, speakers etc. etc. I don't think one can definitively nail this sounds better or that, because measurement wise they are so bullet proof. And I would be seriously remiss if I didn't mention Nuprime - not sure what modules they use but their amps. sound simply superb.
Red Dragon vs Luxman
hifiplus.com
Many of the above reviews, these amps. are pitched against huge Class A/AB amps. that cost many multiples, and still come out sounding very very good. If this doesn't convince someone that Class D is here to stay, not sure what will.
Cheers,
Sid
Red Dragon vs Luxman
Atma-Sphere Music Systems Class D amplifier
Atma-Sphere is best-known for its excellent Class A, Output Transformerless (OTL) amplifier. So, who would have expected the company to deliver an all-solid-state Class D power amp? Eric Neff investigates.
hifiplus.com
Cheers,
Sid
Last edited:
sandeepsasi
Well-Known Member
Interesting discussion, thanks for sharing.
Being a not technical person (electronics and audio amp engineering) I found these bits from the thread interesting. Can anyone explain what this means? This is not a quote and my understanding could be wrong.
A class D amplifier is just a Pulse Width Modulation power supply system with a feedback filter.
**Sticking strictly to power amps - as the comment seems to be talking about the amp part. Aren't all power amplifiers that - if we simplify it? A power supply with filters?
Don’t know. This concept is new to me.
So regardless of the type (A, B, AB or D) all power and are essentially power supply designs Meant to amplify incoming signals in a very controlled way for the speaker magnets to be activated in ways that are strictly proportional to the incoming signals, very quickly ?
Thanks for sharing this video link. Paul does a good job of explaining (dumbing it down) for people like me !
Last edited:
Decadent_Spectre
Well-Known Member
For me, right now, Class D is only for subs. I have heard one Class D that sounded good on speakers but not as good as the alternatives. In my view if you care about music then you will buy what sounds good to you, in my case this is not Class D. It never was.
I tried class D integrated in 2020 (not 2024) but there was no comparison between it and a SET amp, I ended up putting my 300b SET and using the class D integrated as DAC+Pre.
Atmasphere was a shock, a tube giant getting into Class D, but then again a lot of people consider Atmasphere OTL's to be quite analytical and sterile. So not sure. I have not heard them.
After trying class D, SS class A, I am going back to all tubes (dac, pre, power), and back to SET, to me they sound neutral, colourful (not coloured), and pure and involving and high resolution with fabulous bass (as well) like nothing else.
The only class D that I am currently interested in listening is Spec from Japan, I am told the designer has modelled with SET tube amps as a goal. I am interested to see if he has succeeded.
I don't understand the need for switching to the compromise of class D (except in Manohar's case lol), saving power, or tube life or anything makes no sense to an audiophile who goes to all kinds or expense and bother and customs and shipping and repair in the service of high quality sound.
I feel like the class D movement is just like the move from tube to SS or vinyl to CD or high efficiency to low efficiency speakers, to put more margins for manufacturers and convenience (in case of speaker --> smaller speakers), and not in the service of sound. Blind following of technology has hampered audio since 1940s which is why WE amps, speakers, TTs, amps from yester era from 30s-50s command such high price.
Perhaps class D will again take over and 20 years from now once class A is extinct people will be hunting for Accuphase or Luxman SS class A "vintage" amps from the 2010s that got the tone and sound right.
Perhaps I am wrong, I don't have extensive experience with the latest and greatest class D and perhaps I would be proved wrong, but given the trends in audio and given how 60s speaker drives, and 50s EMT TT technology still beat today's audio quite often, I wouldn't hold my breath.
If you want convenience, less heat, etc get high-end earbuds IMHO.
Atmasphere was a shock, a tube giant getting into Class D, but then again a lot of people consider Atmasphere OTL's to be quite analytical and sterile. So not sure. I have not heard them.
After trying class D, SS class A, I am going back to all tubes (dac, pre, power), and back to SET, to me they sound neutral, colourful (not coloured), and pure and involving and high resolution with fabulous bass (as well) like nothing else.
The only class D that I am currently interested in listening is Spec from Japan, I am told the designer has modelled with SET tube amps as a goal. I am interested to see if he has succeeded.
I don't understand the need for switching to the compromise of class D (except in Manohar's case lol), saving power, or tube life or anything makes no sense to an audiophile who goes to all kinds or expense and bother and customs and shipping and repair in the service of high quality sound.
I feel like the class D movement is just like the move from tube to SS or vinyl to CD or high efficiency to low efficiency speakers, to put more margins for manufacturers and convenience (in case of speaker --> smaller speakers), and not in the service of sound. Blind following of technology has hampered audio since 1940s which is why WE amps, speakers, TTs, amps from yester era from 30s-50s command such high price.
Perhaps class D will again take over and 20 years from now once class A is extinct people will be hunting for Accuphase or Luxman SS class A "vintage" amps from the 2010s that got the tone and sound right.
Perhaps I am wrong, I don't have extensive experience with the latest and greatest class D and perhaps I would be proved wrong, but given the trends in audio and given how 60s speaker drives, and 50s EMT TT technology still beat today's audio quite often, I wouldn't hold my breath.
If you want convenience, less heat, etc get high-end earbuds IMHO.
Passive_audio_enthusiast
Well-Known Member
In t
In terms of accurate sound reproduction and transparency, class D is as good as any other classes. If class A or AB sounded better for a person than transparent Class D, well they are not transparent, but the person who enjoys them like that non transparent sound of the class A.
While reading on class d, I found this and thought this cut’n paste worth documenting here.
Bob Carver
"I built many of them right here in my own laboratory with the thought they could and would fulfill that final promise.... I was never able to build a Class D amplifier that sounded as good as a linear one."
Cyrill Hammer (Soulution Audio)
"If you want to have your product performing at the cutting edge it is not possible with today's known switching technologies. In order to come close to the performance of the best linear design we would need high-current semiconductors that provide switching frequencies of several MHz or even GHz."
Lew Johnson (Conrad Johnson)
"I tend to think that Class D circuit design is an approach best relegated to producing low-cost, physically manageable multichannel amplifiers where one might accept some compromise in sound quality for the sake of squeezing five, six, or seven 100 watt channels into one moderate-sized package for a budget home-theater installation."
Vladimir Shushurin (Lamm Industries)
"No, it is not. And I would like to respond to the second part of this question with an allegory. Any field of human activity defines a number of requirements which, when properly implemented, guarantee a positive outcome. For example, the basic requirement in the army and sports is an able-bodied individual. So, it would be quite natural to concentrate on searching for such an individual (especially as we know where to find him). However, out of the blue we decide to choose a feeble-bodied person who, on top of that, is encumbered by various diseases. Having made this decision (which is a priori improper) we start justifying it to ourselves and others by citing the great state of our medicine, which is capable of curing many ailments."
Fumio Ohashi (BAlabo)
"No. Class D can't really be considered for super-high-end performance in its present stage of development, although it can be fine for mid-market products."
Nelson Pass (Pass Labs)
"Does a $10 bottle of wine compete with a $100 bottle? Of course it does, and it often wins based on price. Right at the moment Class D designers seem to be still focusing on the objectively measured performance of their amplifiers. I expect that at some point the economics of the marketplace will encourage them to pay more attention to the subjective qualities, and then they will probably play a greater role in the high end."
Jürgen Reis (MBL)
"I have worked a lot lately with Class D. Ninety-nine percent of Class D circuits are not competitive with linear circuits. Most Class D sounds sterile. It's tricky to figure out what to do to compensate for that."
Thorsten Loesch (iFi - AMR)
"I have yet to hear a pure class D Amp I’d rate above "below average for solid state" (which is not very high performance). In a little update of my classic 'Valve Analogue Stages for DACs' I wrote: "Perhaps more crucially, so called Class D Amplifiers, which have in recent times sprouted up like mushrooms after a warm rain, continue to use the straight two or three level modulation scheme described above. And thus they still require the use of heavy handed noise shaping to attain anything like acceptable 16 Bit Audio performance.The clock frequencies for these amplifiers are usually at 300 KHz to 1MHz in the best cases. That is 3,000 to 10,000 times lower than what is required to attain 16 Bit / 44.1 KHz performance without noise shaping and other forms of signal manipulation! And again, one is baffled and perplexed by the rave reviews many Class D amplifiers receive, as baffled as one was about the late 90s reviews of timeslicing DACs. The best of breed I have auditioned were certainly not bad; however in direct comparison to the best available valve and solid state amplifiers they do not produce a very good sound. Well, at least they offer novelty and the reviewers something to write about other than another (however good sounding) 8 Watt valve amp. Incidentally, the best sounding Class D amps tend to be really low power single chip devices (putting out little more than the 8 watt valve amps), presumably because they are faster AND because they always work near what one might call a full scale, if they would be DACs. On second thought, they of COURSE are DA Converters and where a Class D amplifier accepts analogue input directly it is an A2D converter followed by a power D2A converter! What an insight!?"
Mark Levinson
"Interleaving of multiple Class D Amplifiers is potentially a step in the right direction, but does not go far enough.Personally I think that the best option would be something that combines a Class D Amplifier for the heavy lifting with something Class A for fine detail. Probably implemented in the style I did for AMR’s AM-77 "Jikoda" Style. In this case both of the circuits involved can operate fully open loop. In many ways the problems in Class D Amplifiers are analogous (but not identical to) those in Class B Amplifiers (but without an option to implement Class AB or Class A) so similar solutions apply. All Class D amplifiers are essentially delta-sigma DAC’s. If the input is not digital PWM signals (aka "DSD") but analogue audio then it is also a Delta Sigma Analogue to digital converter...Now DSD (aka SACD) which to my ears fails to come close, never mind equal true PCM CD Replay in most aspects of sound quality, operates at 2.8MHz switching, or around 10 times as fast as common Class D Amplifiers...Why anyone would want to listen through an A2D followed by an D2A Converter that are around 10 times worse than single speed DSD is beyond me. But with enough hype and snazzy naming it cannot help but sell high and wide."
Bob Carver
"I built many of them right here in my own laboratory with the thought they could and would fulfill that final promise.... I was never able to build a Class D amplifier that sounded as good as a linear one."
Cyrill Hammer (Soulution Audio)
"If you want to have your product performing at the cutting edge it is not possible with today's known switching technologies. In order to come close to the performance of the best linear design we would need high-current semiconductors that provide switching frequencies of several MHz or even GHz."
Lew Johnson (Conrad Johnson)
"I tend to think that Class D circuit design is an approach best relegated to producing low-cost, physically manageable multichannel amplifiers where one might accept some compromise in sound quality for the sake of squeezing five, six, or seven 100 watt channels into one moderate-sized package for a budget home-theater installation."
Vladimir Shushurin (Lamm Industries)
"No, it is not. And I would like to respond to the second part of this question with an allegory. Any field of human activity defines a number of requirements which, when properly implemented, guarantee a positive outcome. For example, the basic requirement in the army and sports is an able-bodied individual. So, it would be quite natural to concentrate on searching for such an individual (especially as we know where to find him). However, out of the blue we decide to choose a feeble-bodied person who, on top of that, is encumbered by various diseases. Having made this decision (which is a priori improper) we start justifying it to ourselves and others by citing the great state of our medicine, which is capable of curing many ailments."
Fumio Ohashi (BAlabo)
"No. Class D can't really be considered for super-high-end performance in its present stage of development, although it can be fine for mid-market products."
Nelson Pass (Pass Labs)
"Does a $10 bottle of wine compete with a $100 bottle? Of course it does, and it often wins based on price. Right at the moment Class D designers seem to be still focusing on the objectively measured performance of their amplifiers. I expect that at some point the economics of the marketplace will encourage them to pay more attention to the subjective qualities, and then they will probably play a greater role in the high end."
Jürgen Reis (MBL)
"I have worked a lot lately with Class D. Ninety-nine percent of Class D circuits are not competitive with linear circuits. Most Class D sounds sterile. It's tricky to figure out what to do to compensate for that."
Thorsten Loesch (iFi - AMR)
"I have yet to hear a pure class D Amp I’d rate above "below average for solid state" (which is not very high performance). In a little update of my classic 'Valve Analogue Stages for DACs' I wrote: "Perhaps more crucially, so called Class D Amplifiers, which have in recent times sprouted up like mushrooms after a warm rain, continue to use the straight two or three level modulation scheme described above. And thus they still require the use of heavy handed noise shaping to attain anything like acceptable 16 Bit Audio performance.The clock frequencies for these amplifiers are usually at 300 KHz to 1MHz in the best cases. That is 3,000 to 10,000 times lower than what is required to attain 16 Bit / 44.1 KHz performance without noise shaping and other forms of signal manipulation! And again, one is baffled and perplexed by the rave reviews many Class D amplifiers receive, as baffled as one was about the late 90s reviews of timeslicing DACs. The best of breed I have auditioned were certainly not bad; however in direct comparison to the best available valve and solid state amplifiers they do not produce a very good sound. Well, at least they offer novelty and the reviewers something to write about other than another (however good sounding) 8 Watt valve amp. Incidentally, the best sounding Class D amps tend to be really low power single chip devices (putting out little more than the 8 watt valve amps), presumably because they are faster AND because they always work near what one might call a full scale, if they would be DACs. On second thought, they of COURSE are DA Converters and where a Class D amplifier accepts analogue input directly it is an A2D converter followed by a power D2A converter! What an insight!?"
Mark Levinson
"Interleaving of multiple Class D Amplifiers is potentially a step in the right direction, but does not go far enough.Personally I think that the best option would be something that combines a Class D Amplifier for the heavy lifting with something Class A for fine detail. Probably implemented in the style I did for AMR’s AM-77 "Jikoda" Style. In this case both of the circuits involved can operate fully open loop. In many ways the problems in Class D Amplifiers are analogous (but not identical to) those in Class B Amplifiers (but without an option to implement Class AB or Class A) so similar solutions apply. All Class D amplifiers are essentially delta-sigma DAC’s. If the input is not digital PWM signals (aka "DSD") but analogue audio then it is also a Delta Sigma Analogue to digital converter...Now DSD (aka SACD) which to my ears fails to come close, never mind equal true PCM CD Replay in most aspects of sound quality, operates at 2.8MHz switching, or around 10 times as fast as common Class D Amplifiers...Why anyone would want to listen through an A2D followed by an D2A Converter that are around 10 times worse than single speed DSD is beyond me. But with enough hype and snazzy naming it cannot help but sell high and wide."
All these stalwarts of Audio seem to say class D amps will never be as good as…
Two possibilities come to mind.
1. They are right and class D amps will never sound as good
2. Some crazy person who has not read what these giants of amp design have said and goes on to prove them wring
History of science is replete with examples of discoveries and inventions that were deemed impossible by foremost experts of the day.
I am intrigued by Lewinsons statement “All Class D amplifiers are essentially delta-sigma DAC’s” wonder what this means. I thought they all were essentially SMPS with filters for the feedback signals
Two possibilities come to mind.
1. They are right and class D amps will never sound as good
2. Some crazy person who has not read what these giants of amp design have said and goes on to prove them wring
History of science is replete with examples of discoveries and inventions that were deemed impossible by foremost experts of the day.
I am intrigued by Lewinsons statement “All Class D amplifiers are essentially delta-sigma DAC’s” wonder what this means. I thought they all were essentially SMPS with filters for the feedback signals
Last edited:
Decadent_Spectre
Well-Known Member
Class D is only for subs is a misnomer, why would studio monitors from Genelec/Adam/Dynaudio/Kii Three/Sigberg/Barefoot/Mesanovic run on Class D amplification then?
You are welcome to your beliefs, it would be prudent to remember studio monitors are not meant for listening to music at home. Further the use of certain amplifiers by certain people/companies does not mean they are good, the human belief of "greatness by proximity" is flawed, yet common, especially in Indian society.
People are free to, and they exercise this, believe what they want, one must hear and decide. There are many who only care for things like money/branding or measurement/capabilities and they do not necessarily care for the music or hear a difference. I will offer this, for someone who is a meat eater (I am not) will a meat substitute suffice? For someone of a specific faith, would they substitute with a different one? The same for beliefs? Perhaps other examples.
People who view amplifiers as tools to reproduce sound for their listening will forever endorse the newest technology. People who view amplifiers as tools which touch their hearts through music will forever choose that which moves them. Therein lies the FUNdamental difference between them.
Peace and let the music play.
The Marantz PM7000N offers big, spacious and insightful sound, class-leading clarity and a solid streaming platform in a award winning package.
