Nuuk said:...at the risk of de-railing the whole class-T thing, I have to say that I have gone back to my Gainclone and quite honestly enjoy it more than any of the class-T amps, even if it is not as good in some ways, it is just more enjoyable!
Yes, Nick, I know what you mean. At this point I think I prefer the sound of the chipamp over the class-T, too.
But all I can really say is: it is what it is - either you prefer one or you prefer the other.
I think sound of the Charlize will push a lot of people's buttons in the right way - maybe even more so than the the sound of the chipamps. But for me, I feel that the chipamp moves me more. It just does more of what I like than the Charlize does.
Having said that, I think we're in a win/win situation here as far as these amps go - the Charlize is $90 for the assembled module, the Gainclone kits from both Brian and Peter are $45 - $85, depending on the flavor. And here we are comparing them to multi-$K amps. Does it get much better than that?
I wonder if the class-T amps will evolve to a point where they do the emotional thing as well as the chipamps. I wouldn't be surpised to see that somewhere in the near future.
I find that a tube preamp enhances the presence, air, lushness, and all those other good things a good tube pre does, but the character of the amps are still quite distinct. I'll be interested in hearing your impressions when you try it.
Best,
KT
amolan,
Try Alpha pot. I've got mine from jaycar.
Cheap and very good.
I'm using one 50k between Monica2 and ClassT and I prefer it to 50k stepped attenuator. Very shot interconnect, in fact two male RCA plug connected back to back, to keep capacitance low and bandwidth high.
Funny with the Aplha pot, Class-T has better bass and plays higher than stepped attenuator. I am feeling like turning off sub now or at least lowering its volume.
Some say its compressing the signal! But I don't feel like this. Now piano sounds like real piano. Even my 3yr old daughter asked, what's that sound?
I don't know if jaycar has got 25K but 10Klog is available.
Try Alpha pot. I've got mine from jaycar.
Cheap and very good.
I'm using one 50k between Monica2 and ClassT and I prefer it to 50k stepped attenuator. Very shot interconnect, in fact two male RCA plug connected back to back, to keep capacitance low and bandwidth high.
Funny with the Aplha pot, Class-T has better bass and plays higher than stepped attenuator. I am feeling like turning off sub now or at least lowering its volume.
Some say its compressing the signal! But I don't feel like this. Now piano sounds like real piano. Even my 3yr old daughter asked, what's that sound?
I don't know if jaycar has got 25K but 10Klog is available.
The class-T amps are extremely analytical, certainly with anything less than a very good recording, they could be said to be too analytical!
Now Mr Dodo says that he prefers his Charlize with a pot, rather than a stepped attenuator which I would say is more analytical than the pot! Do you see what I'm getting at here?
I'll do some more listening but using a pot instead of the attenuators that I have been using, and see if that makes much difference.
I agree with KT though, that both the chip amps and class-T amps are extremely good given the cost. It will be interesting to get some more views from those who have tried them both!
In fairness, I should also say that I have a stronger preference for the GC in my main system where I use a subwoofer. I wonder if the strange phase characteristics of the clss-T amps make it hard(er) to successfully couple a sub! Has anybody else tried a class-T as the 'main' amp in a system that uses a separate sub?
Now Mr Dodo says that he prefers his Charlize with a pot, rather than a stepped attenuator which I would say is more analytical than the pot! Do you see what I'm getting at here?
I'll do some more listening but using a pot instead of the attenuators that I have been using, and see if that makes much difference.
I agree with KT though, that both the chip amps and class-T amps are extremely good given the cost. It will be interesting to get some more views from those who have tried them both!
In fairness, I should also say that I have a stronger preference for the GC in my main system where I use a subwoofer. I wonder if the strange phase characteristics of the clss-T amps make it hard(er) to successfully couple a sub! Has anybody else tried a class-T as the 'main' amp in a system that uses a separate sub?
Nuuk said:The class-T amps are extremely analytical, certainly with anything less than a very good recording, they could be said to be too analytical!
Now Mr Dodo says that he prefers his Charlize with a pot, rather than a stepped attenuator which I would say is more analytical than the pot! Do you see what I'm getting at here?
I'll do some more listening but using a pot instead of the attenuators that I have been using, and see if that makes much difference.
I agree with KT though, that both the chip amps and class-T amps are extremely good given the cost. It will be interesting to get some more views from those who have tried them both!
In fairness, I should also say that I have a stronger preference for the GC in my main system where I use a subwoofer. I wonder if the strange phase characteristics of the clss-T amps make it hard(er) to successfully couple a sub! Has anybody else tried a class-T as the 'main' amp in a system that uses a separate sub?
I use Dipole subs, Stereo subs crossing to my OB's at 90hz. I have found that intergrating the subs with the charlize was much easier than with my tube amps. I have found no strange things happening. This may because my OB's dont make much bass under about 70hz, so there would be no phase variations being heard as with a speaker that go to 40hz or so. Thats how I see it anyway. I have used a GainClone (3375) on my OB's.It had a nice delicate top end, but I prefere the charlize. It has better imaging, bass, and detail. I had only had the charlize for a week when I compared them, but it sounds much better that it did at the time of comparison. My 2 cents worth
Nigel
Nuuk,
The taiwanese stepped attenuator that I use(d), open at full is 3db short, compared to Alpha pot. If I understand correctly, the Alpha pot will sound twice as loud open full than this stepped Att.
I have measured log curve, it's not exactly the same.
I was thinking about making attenuator that mimics the log curve of Alpha pot, except that I won't get Dale res. cheap.
I won't say that I'm clipping my ClassT now with Monica2 but get enough volume. I'll try the 50K Alps Blue pot sometime but I feel like a waste of time and will be suprised if it's better than the Alpha, specially in the bass.
I was sure an ladder attenuator sounds better that a pot, now I'm not so sure anymore.
The taiwanese stepped attenuator that I use(d), open at full is 3db short, compared to Alpha pot. If I understand correctly, the Alpha pot will sound twice as loud open full than this stepped Att.
I have measured log curve, it's not exactly the same.
I was thinking about making attenuator that mimics the log curve of Alpha pot, except that I won't get Dale res. cheap.
I won't say that I'm clipping my ClassT now with Monica2 but get enough volume. I'll try the 50K Alps Blue pot sometime but I feel like a waste of time and will be suprised if it's better than the Alpha, specially in the bass.
I was sure an ladder attenuator sounds better that a pot, now I'm not so sure anymore.
Nuuk said:I agree with KT though, that both the chip amps and class-T amps are extremely good given the cost. It will be interesting to get some more views from those who have tried them both!
Bonjour,
I used BrianGt premium kit for 1 year as second amp in my main system (first amp. = Rogue Tempest Magnum KT-88 or KT-90). The GC has a very enjoyable sound, just like and old tube amp. The level of detail is good, but the precision of the image is not the best. The bass is good, but not very well define. Switching to Chalize was a major upgrade for me. Charlize is just like a modern tube amp...... with more bass. A friend came to my house yesterday to compare my Rogue Tempest to Charlize and he said that to his surprise, they sound very close. He prefer the tube amp because it sound a little bit more warm (Charlize sound is more clean) and the vocal is more forward. Charlize deliver details, but in my system it is far from being clinical. Piano and voices are so natural. The only thing that I will address in the future is the "steroid" bass of Charlize. Next year, I'll replace the input cap as you suggested. Other then that, Charlize is close to the nirvana
Regards,
Subs
Nuuk:
I used a Charlize (also Autocostruire and a modded T-amp) with a VMPS New Original sub, Acurus A100 (one channel), Behringer XO crossed anywhere between 60-200 hz (depending on the recording), driving Lowther MLTL's, VMPS QSO404's, GMA Europas. I'd say they successfully integrated, after messing with phasing, input and output levels, VMPS tuning. The Acurus, of course, doesn't have enough steam.
However, I just built a dual monobloc ICEpower amp using two 250ASP's. I'm working on another ICE mono to power the sub.
Regards,
Larry Welsh
Nuuk:
I used a Charlize (also Autocostruire and a modded T-amp) with a VMPS New Original sub, Acurus A100 (one channel), Behringer XO crossed anywhere between 60-200 hz (depending on the recording), driving Lowther MLTL's, VMPS QSO404's, GMA Europas. I'd say they successfully integrated, after messing with phasing, input and output levels, VMPS tuning. The Acurus, of course, doesn't have enough steam.
However, I just built a dual monobloc ICEpower amp using two 250ASP's. I'm working on another ICE mono to power the sub.
Regards,
Larry Welsh
Nuuk said:
It's a Pedja Rogic design that you can read about here .
Well, I tried swapping the phase but I can only change 180 degrees by swapping the plugs around. I didn't seem to sound 'right' weither way.
I have Variable phase adjust on my sub amps. I figure I have it around 120, or it may 70 depending on which way you look at it. Anyway it seems to work seamlessly in my system.
Today I played a Telarc Digital disc. "THE FIREBIRD". I haven't played this for several years, manly because , after I sold my Naim amp, nothing else I owned played it with the dynamics, pace & rythem that it deserved. Well that was until Charlize. Man all I can say is that this is an amazing amp. The dynamics from this 6 watt amp is mind boggling
.
I can see me owning thia amp for a long time.
Nigel
.I can see me owning thia amp for a long time.
Nigel
Me Too
I too like Charlize's dynamic range - it is very impressive.
I think I've had her now about three weeks and once in a while I take the top off my case, look in, and still can't believe so much is coming out of this little thing.
I have had quite a few amps and I have mostly prefered low wattage amps for their speed and clarity - even if somewhat lacking in dynamics.
I wander if some of the other Higher wattage d-class amps out there can give us even more dynamic range withought losing Charlize's clarity and speed.
Maybe a Charlize II @ 15 to 30 or maybe even 100W.
Bachiano
I too like Charlize's dynamic range - it is very impressive.
I think I've had her now about three weeks and once in a while I take the top off my case, look in, and still can't believe so much is coming out of this little thing.
I have had quite a few amps and I have mostly prefered low wattage amps for their speed and clarity - even if somewhat lacking in dynamics.
I wander if some of the other Higher wattage d-class amps out there can give us even more dynamic range withought losing Charlize's clarity and speed.
Maybe a Charlize II @ 15 to 30 or maybe even 100W.
Bachiano
100w Charlize... But then you would need appropriate power supply. Certainly not battery powered nor the single rail 12v PS of the current Chalize. Which will mean bigger box and higher cost. So that it will be harder to test with different PS than the universal +12v that Charlize only need.
And I'm not even sure it will sound better than Charlize.
Some ppl have compared amp1 (100w if I remember correctly) and amp3 (comparable to Charlize) of 41hz somewhere, don't remember where.
And I'm not even sure it will sound better than Charlize.
Some ppl have compared amp1 (100w if I remember correctly) and amp3 (comparable to Charlize) of 41hz somewhere, don't remember where.
I'm concerned about you guys wanting more dynamics from the charlize. Exactly how loud are you playing the music? Is it because the listening area is large that more dynamics is neccessary?
I plan on getting a charlize with aircores, and use it to power a folded MLTL with fostex fe167 (94 db/w/m according to data sheets) probably with baffle step for listening in a small room in an apartment. We'll it be adequate? I've listened to my dad's stereo at home and the amp gets really loud past 2 watts on speakers that have a 89 db/w/m rating. How loud is sound in terms of 6 watts, 20 watts, 50 watts, 100 watts? Isn't listening beyond 80 db for prolonged period of times not good for hearing? I understand you need wattage for peaks and wattage must double to increase 3 db, but still...
(Lot of questions, couldn't find by searching, seemed like right thread to ask... )
I plan on getting a charlize with aircores, and use it to power a folded MLTL with fostex fe167 (94 db/w/m according to data sheets) probably with baffle step for listening in a small room in an apartment. We'll it be adequate? I've listened to my dad's stereo at home and the amp gets really loud past 2 watts on speakers that have a 89 db/w/m rating. How loud is sound in terms of 6 watts, 20 watts, 50 watts, 100 watts? Isn't listening beyond 80 db for prolonged period of times not good for hearing? I understand you need wattage for peaks and wattage must double to increase 3 db, but still...
(Lot of questions, couldn't find by searching, seemed like right thread to ask...
)Hara said:I'm concerned about you guys wanting more dynamics from the charlize. Exactly how loud are you playing the music? Is it because the listening area is large that more dynamics is neccessary?
I plan on getting a charlize with aircores, and use it to power a folded MLTL with fostex fe167 (94 db/w/m according to data sheets) probably with baffle step for listening in a small room in an apartment. We'll it be adequate? I've listened to my dad's stereo at home and the amp gets really loud past 2 watts on speakers that have a 89 db/w/m rating. How loud is sound in terms of 6 watts, 20 watts, 50 watts, 100 watts? Isn't listening beyond 80 db for prolonged period of times not good for hearing? I understand you need wattage for peaks and wattage must double to increase 3 db, but still...
(Lot of questions, couldn't find by searching, seemed like right thread to ask...
Hi Hara, I dont think anyone is wanting more dynamics from their charlize. We are saying more that we are amazed by what this amp can do. I compared it to my 75w Naim in the dynamics. You will have no trouble with the Charlize with your speakers. You have made a good choice getting the air core charlize. I am over the moon with mine. It replaced a 300bSET, and I was so happy with it , after 3 weeks I sold my 300b. You will get plenty of volume with 94dbspeakers , even with losing a couple of db with the network . You will find that charlize has plenty up its sleeve for dynamic passages. I played the "FireBird" a couple of days ago, and it scared my wife with the dynamic range. Its all good, and I am sure you will be happy.
Nigel