Bob Carver says next year
I saw a long video interview with Bob Carver a year or so ago, and he has been saying for a decade or so that Class D amps are going to take over "next year". But it seems that the big issue is simply that it's not as easy to make a good-sounding Class D amp as a class AB. It simply requires more engineering work, kind of like building a hybrid car.
For small mass-market products Class D is already here in a big way; nearly any ipod or internet oriented product already has Class D amps already.
Ask my mother or a teenager to point out their audio amplifers and she will say she doesn't have any audio amplifiers. Because now class D amps are so small and efficient they are not boxes that sit alone spewing heat. The general public doesn't even know they are part of the speakerbars and docks that they listen to music through.
So now the market for standalone amps is people who purport to know "better than others" about how to get good sound. And what those people know is decades old, namely that class D amps don't sound good. So they don't buy class D amps.
We are probably at the point now where Class D amps are on average better than class AB amps with the same bill of material cost, but since the public doesn't care about amps anymore, nobody has noticed yet.
I saw a long video interview with Bob Carver a year or so ago, and he has been saying for a decade or so that Class D amps are going to take over "next year". But it seems that the big issue is simply that it's not as easy to make a good-sounding Class D amp as a class AB. It simply requires more engineering work, kind of like building a hybrid car.
For small mass-market products Class D is already here in a big way; nearly any ipod or internet oriented product already has Class D amps already.
Ask my mother or a teenager to point out their audio amplifers and she will say she doesn't have any audio amplifiers. Because now class D amps are so small and efficient they are not boxes that sit alone spewing heat. The general public doesn't even know they are part of the speakerbars and docks that they listen to music through.
So now the market for standalone amps is people who purport to know "better than others" about how to get good sound. And what those people know is decades old, namely that class D amps don't sound good. So they don't buy class D amps.
We are probably at the point now where Class D amps are on average better than class AB amps with the same bill of material cost, but since the public doesn't care about amps anymore, nobody has noticed yet.
Just a simple statement from my experience:
Any amp that can produce sound within certain parameters and is not driven beyond its limits where it starts to distort audible is indistinguishable from any amp with similar parameters.
I go even further: Any amp that is below 0.1dB harmonic distortion - 1/2/3/4/ etc order - is less than 0.1% THD, is driven below its clipping range, has a flat frequency response within the audible range and has a noise floor at less than 80db within the frequency range is indistinguishable from any amp with figures ten or 100 times better.
I have compared Brystons with NADs, with an old quad 405 and with a PWM technics SEC 01, some old but good pioneer receivers, some Harman Kardons, Regas, Sansuis, etc...and my present hypex (which are good enough to have been installed by David Messinger's own line of actively amped speakers Übersicht | Hifi Aktiv – David Messinger GmbH) - a wide range of amps not in numbers but "performance and age" and found this to be true for my ears.
I stopped worrying and listen to music and not the equipment.
Any amp that can produce sound within certain parameters and is not driven beyond its limits where it starts to distort audible is indistinguishable from any amp with similar parameters.
I go even further: Any amp that is below 0.1dB harmonic distortion - 1/2/3/4/ etc order - is less than 0.1% THD, is driven below its clipping range, has a flat frequency response within the audible range and has a noise floor at less than 80db within the frequency range is indistinguishable from any amp with figures ten or 100 times better.
I have compared Brystons with NADs, with an old quad 405 and with a PWM technics SEC 01, some old but good pioneer receivers, some Harman Kardons, Regas, Sansuis, etc...and my present hypex (which are good enough to have been installed by David Messinger's own line of actively amped speakers Übersicht | Hifi Aktiv – David Messinger GmbH) - a wide range of amps not in numbers but "performance and age" and found this to be true for my ears.
I stopped worrying and listen to music and not the equipment.
Last edited:
It is more like making a perfect class B amp out of 2 linearized halves: there will be always cross-over region in class D amps. The difference between class B and class D amps is only in an energy effectiveness. While class B wastes an energy turning it into heat, class D saves it in an inductor of an output filter.
I believe Class D has its place - below 450hz. There is just a little more realism and body with Class A and Class AB over Class D in the upper ranges. True with Tubes or SS.
I have the best of both worlds - Class D (Icepower 1000ASP) and Class A (Krell KSA-50 Clone) on mid / highs.
I have the best of both worlds - Class D (Icepower 1000ASP) and Class A (Krell KSA-50 Clone) on mid / highs.
Did not know we were talking religion.
I do not believe - I implement and find any audiophile statement similar to yours simply not reflecting reality.
typical audiophile talk w/o much substance or body or any connection to reality.
Last edited:
Just my purely subjective opinion. Your purely subjective opinion is no more factual than mine, is it?
I really like my Hypex, Icepower, Tripath builds, just prefer them best in lower audio band, that's all. No need to get your feelings hurt.
Looks like you insist on having the last word and argue for the sake of arguing. I had a partner like that about 40 years ago. Funny he never got anywhere.
Mine is backed up by measurements - yours in spite of measurements. Therefore mine is based on facts, yours on: hot air?
And if two amps measure below the thresholds that in my experience are sufficient to not let you hear distortion, noise floor or uneven frequency response, then in my experience those amps will sound the same if driven within their specs. Any other claim is unsubstantiated by blinded listening test.
And if one says: maybe we don't measure parameters that let others hear "un-blinded" differences: AFAIK in at least 40 years of audio no one has come up with an enhanced set of parametres to test for in speakers, amps etc. The only new one is jitter in cd, and maybe some other metrics connected to digital audio.
If you like anything - fine, but if you make claims like: I believe....and then start the usual audiophile talk, you can expect to be taken to task.
Last edited:
In spite of measurements? What does this have to do with my preferring class D amps on bass duty only? Somehow the spec measurements would explain my position? Would my Hypex 400AD be any different spec-wise than someone else's?
If all amps sound alike, why are you such a proponent of Hypex? Why not promote the cheapest amp that fits your measurements and call it a day? Finding a little $25 amp that would sound like a $10K Krell would be most interesting to me - let me know when you find it.
I would much rather explain my point with the caveat "I believe" rather than your "my present hypex beats NAD, Bryston, Quad," (add your amp here), etc.
What is so special about yours if all amps are sound like as you state?
I built half a dozen Hypex amps. They were good. Just a bit lacking on HF for me.
If all amps sound alike, why are you such a proponent of Hypex? Why not promote the cheapest amp that fits your measurements and call it a day? Finding a little $25 amp that would sound like a $10K Krell would be most interesting to me - let me know when you find it.
I would much rather explain my point with the caveat "I believe" rather than your "my present hypex beats NAD, Bryston, Quad," (add your amp here), etc.
What is so special about yours if all amps are sound like as you state?
I built half a dozen Hypex amps. They were good. Just a bit lacking on HF for me.
OK, cannot resist...
adding my 2 cents.
"Any amp that can produce sound within certain parameters and is not driven beyond its limits where it starts to distort audible is indistinguishable from any amp with similar parameters."
OK, Julian Hirsch discipiles live on! As most audiohiles who can hear know, different amplifiers do sound different-take this as a fact that I believe intrinsically.
I have heard very good implementations of both ICEpower and Hypex in my system. They both sound pretty good, with Hypex being better than ICEpower (better soundstage depth layering, and more body to images). Neither of these amp designs sound as good as my PASS X 150.5, and all of these amps sound different. I have not yet heard Devialet's "new" hybrid amplifier technology-they use a class A amplifier for voltage gain, and then put a switching (class D) stage in parallel with the class A amp for current drive-unfortunately they do not make a stand a lone power amp with this technology, so it is hard to evaluate their approach as an amplifier alone.
As part of a different discussion here, just to push a pointed stick a little, consider: In a sense, all systems are "digital" in nature if we get small enough. I remember reading an interview with Tim de Paravacini where he noted that analogue tape is really digital, in that the magnetic domains, are molecular, and each molecule will either be positively charged or negatively charged. So when we look at analog tape at the molecular level, it is a digital system, albeit one with an extremely high sample rate!
adding my 2 cents.
"Any amp that can produce sound within certain parameters and is not driven beyond its limits where it starts to distort audible is indistinguishable from any amp with similar parameters."
OK, Julian Hirsch discipiles live on! As most audiohiles who can hear know, different amplifiers do sound different-take this as a fact that I believe intrinsically.
I have heard very good implementations of both ICEpower and Hypex in my system. They both sound pretty good, with Hypex being better than ICEpower (better soundstage depth layering, and more body to images). Neither of these amp designs sound as good as my PASS X 150.5, and all of these amps sound different. I have not yet heard Devialet's "new" hybrid amplifier technology-they use a class A amplifier for voltage gain, and then put a switching (class D) stage in parallel with the class A amp for current drive-unfortunately they do not make a stand a lone power amp with this technology, so it is hard to evaluate their approach as an amplifier alone.
As part of a different discussion here, just to push a pointed stick a little, consider: In a sense, all systems are "digital" in nature if we get small enough. I remember reading an interview with Tim de Paravacini where he noted that analogue tape is really digital, in that the magnetic domains, are molecular, and each molecule will either be positively charged or negatively charged. So when we look at analog tape at the molecular level, it is a digital system, albeit one with an extremely high sample rate!
1. we are talking class d amps, and the hypex have the power output I need and are at a price level that is affordable. I have used the T amp, quite nice but not enough power.
I did not say beat, I said the sounded the same, i am not stupid enough to destroy my argument that when within certain measured parameters all amps sound similar by then saying they beat anything. Can you read or are your prejudices clouding your comprehension?
Again - reading comprehension. Where did I say anything about special? You implied in your famous 450Hz statement that those amps are basically good for nothing else, a completely unsupported statement by any facts.
I countered your audiophilically trenched non factual statement by my experience supported my measurable facts.
"found this to be true for my ears."
Reading comprehension again or just a smelly red herring. I did not say all amps sound the same, please carefully read what I wrote, maybe by contemplating the words the meaning will become clear at one point.
Another statement from the usual not supported by any blinded listening tests.
What does it mean, to believe in something "intrinsically?" Does that mean you never question your belief? Does it mean the nature of the facts demand belief?
t
Last edited:
Wow, do you have measurable facts proving I like what I dislike?
Looks like your reading comprehension needs a little sharpening...Just my preference...to each his own.
Last edited:
Ok for the 1st part : that explains the 1st Watt theory and everything associated .
For the second part : No Comment 🙂
For the second part : No Comment 🙂
If this is a statement about personal preference - ok, but your use of language is misleading. To me this sounds like a generalizing statement about the quality of the class d design.
Sorry:
"Reading comprehension again or just a smelly red herring. I did not say all amps sound the same, please carefully read what I wrote, maybe by contemplating the words the meaning will become clear at one point.
Another statement from the usual not supported by any blinded listening tests."
No problem with reading comprehension here, I just entirely disagree with your experience. The three amps I referenced all fall within the parameters of your measurement guidelines, but they all sound distinctly different. Unfortunately, measuring amplifiers with steady state signals does not tells us everything we need to know to evaluate how they sound.
I do not need to be "blinded" to hear clear differences. While expectation bias might explain (although I do not believe so) the differences I hear between the Pass X150.5 and the class D amps, there was no expectation bias involved in determining the difference between the two class D designs in my comparisons of them. BTW, I would not categorize these differences as small, but I am an audiophile...
Clearly we will have to agree that we disagree.
"Reading comprehension again or just a smelly red herring. I did not say all amps sound the same, please carefully read what I wrote, maybe by contemplating the words the meaning will become clear at one point.
Another statement from the usual not supported by any blinded listening tests."
No problem with reading comprehension here, I just entirely disagree with your experience. The three amps I referenced all fall within the parameters of your measurement guidelines, but they all sound distinctly different. Unfortunately, measuring amplifiers with steady state signals does not tells us everything we need to know to evaluate how they sound.
I do not need to be "blinded" to hear clear differences. While expectation bias might explain (although I do not believe so) the differences I hear between the Pass X150.5 and the class D amps, there was no expectation bias involved in determining the difference between the two class D designs in my comparisons of them. BTW, I would not categorize these differences as small, but I am an audiophile...
Clearly we will have to agree that we disagree.
"If I jump down this tower I believe I will be killed" has nothing to do with my personal opinion.
It is a matter of fact, using imprecise language to state the obvious.
You got it wrong. You need blinded test to to show that you really hear a difference which is usually obvious when listening knowing what is playing but always so far has vanished when more rigorous test are done.
Even if those tests where not to the satisfaction of all participating - usually those who found the hypothesis:" there is no difference" not falsified by the tests - the dearth of any data of the many test I have followed and read about showing that there was no audible difference should be an incentive to be careful with statements based on nothing but anecdotal data and subjective experiences.
It is a matter of fact, using imprecise language to state the obvious.
You got it wrong. You need blinded test to to show that you really hear a difference which is usually obvious when listening knowing what is playing but always so far has vanished when more rigorous test are done.
Even if those tests where not to the satisfaction of all participating - usually those who found the hypothesis:" there is no difference" not falsified by the tests - the dearth of any data of the many test I have followed and read about showing that there was no audible difference should be an incentive to be careful with statements based on nothing but anecdotal data and subjective experiences.
Looks like class-D is making a come back 😉
what about Rotel ICE powered class-D amps ?
Home Theater System Surround Sound Amplifier DVD Player - Rotel PRODUCTS
what about Pioneer ICE powered class-D amps ?
SC-37 - 7.1-Channel 3D Ready Elite A/V Receiver | Pioneer Electronics USA
what about the new Mark Levinson class-D amp ?
MarkLevinson - Product Details
what about Rotel ICE powered class-D amps ?
Home Theater System Surround Sound Amplifier DVD Player - Rotel PRODUCTS
what about Pioneer ICE powered class-D amps ?
SC-37 - 7.1-Channel 3D Ready Elite A/V Receiver | Pioneer Electronics USA
what about the new Mark Levinson class-D amp ?
MarkLevinson - Product Details
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Sorry...
"You got it wrong. You need blinded test to to show that you really hear a difference which is usually obvious when listening knowing what is playing but always so far has vanished when more rigorous test are done."
Sorry, you are wrong. Blind tests actually the listener rather than the components in question. Being blinded introduces stressors which make make critical observations difficult. This is all water under the bridge, so to speak. Blind tests are for science, not for qualitative distinction among different flavors.
That's all for this discussion from me.
"You got it wrong. You need blinded test to to show that you really hear a difference which is usually obvious when listening knowing what is playing but always so far has vanished when more rigorous test are done."
Sorry, you are wrong. Blind tests actually the listener rather than the components in question. Being blinded introduces stressors which make make critical observations difficult. This is all water under the bridge, so to speak. Blind tests are for science, not for qualitative distinction among different flavors.
That's all for this discussion from me.
That would be fine if the outcome of sighted tests were expressed simply in the form "I prefer this one". Instead, people say "This one is better" which sounds more like a factual statement. Scores are awarded, which claim to be some measure of goodness rather than mere preference. People will buy or not buy, on the basis of someone else's preferences. In some cases the item will have serious design flaws, whether accidental or deliberate, which demonstrably distort the sound yet some people will prefer it. Fine as a preference; unhelpful as a value judgement.barrows said:
Strangely, there are some people who think that audio is a branch of engineering and therefore a branch of applied science, which may be why they are awkward and ask for blind or double-blind tests. Saying that DBT involves stress so the results are invalid may or may not be true, but it seems very convenient. I guess I would be stressed if my livelihood depended on some ability which sometimes faded when tested.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.