Re: interesting but same
T11, I think you've hit the nail on the head here.
What we designers do is rack our brains, loose sleep, take panic pills and electrocute ourselves so that the rest of you can do what you enjoy best. Listening to music. The more realistic it is, the better. Doesn't matter how you get there, as long as you do. If it works for you then that's it. To hell with anything or anyone else. This game is so damned subjective.
To give you an example, one of my dealer friends used to sell Rega Kite speakers. In my opinion, on their own, they had all the musical prescence of a sausage roll. Now, partner that to a Naim Nait3, and they shone. He sold loads of this set up. Like I said, it's subjective.
Ricky.
T11, I think you've hit the nail on the head here.
What we designers do is rack our brains, loose sleep, take panic pills and electrocute ourselves so that the rest of you can do what you enjoy best. Listening to music. The more realistic it is, the better. Doesn't matter how you get there, as long as you do. If it works for you then that's it. To hell with anything or anyone else. This game is so damned subjective.
To give you an example, one of my dealer friends used to sell Rega Kite speakers. In my opinion, on their own, they had all the musical prescence of a sausage roll. Now, partner that to a Naim Nait3, and they shone. He sold loads of this set up. Like I said, it's subjective.
Ricky.
Sonic merits or lack there of.
T,
When you are in among the trees it is hard to see the forest. That is kind of our situation here. The UcD has been a real epiphany for some and it takes some work to reshape our thinking back to the basics. You are absolutely right in that we must not loose track of the fact that the bottom line is an emotional/moving musical experience. If we are not using that as our goal what is the point? To make some money? HA! Not in this business unless you have a wildly successful product and can actually build it with repeatable performance.
Roger
T,
When you are in among the trees it is hard to see the forest. That is kind of our situation here. The UcD has been a real epiphany for some and it takes some work to reshape our thinking back to the basics. You are absolutely right in that we must not loose track of the fact that the bottom line is an emotional/moving musical experience. If we are not using that as our goal what is the point? To make some money? HA! Not in this business unless you have a wildly successful product and can actually build it with repeatable performance.
Roger
matjans said:
Up to now I haven't seen anyone that realy did a decent traditional amp versus decent class-D comparison resulting in class d amp being worse. Or did I miss it?
Charles: So right, Class D has obvious technical advantages, just like the CD had technical advantages over the LP, and has therefore now largely taken over the position the LP had before. Of course because 99% of music buyers don't care that the CD does not have the same atmosphere and sound stage as the LP.
And much the same can be said about many Class D amplifiers today. The sound is good, but something is missing. At least compared with the best Class A amplifiers around. (Say in the 5-10000 US$ range). Now since this forum is mainly occupied by that last 1% of amplifier buyers / builders who are concerned with the small sonic lack of the Class D amplifier, that is one of the reasons for the (good and healthy) scepticism.
All i'm saying is we are soon crossing the line where there is no reason at all left for using Class A or Class A/B.
Price, size, efficiency is already at level or better with Class D, only some aspects of the sound is worse or on level with Class A. But that is about to change now.
soongsc: You would see that if people were using really good loudspeakers. But with most normal loudspeakers in the 1000$ / box range you can't hear the difference.
And much the same can be said about many Class D amplifiers today. The sound is good, but something is missing. At least compared with the best Class A amplifiers around. (Say in the 5-10000 US$ range). Now since this forum is mainly occupied by that last 1% of amplifier buyers / builders who are concerned with the small sonic lack of the Class D amplifier, that is one of the reasons for the (good and healthy) scepticism.
All i'm saying is we are soon crossing the line where there is no reason at all left for using Class A or Class A/B.
Price, size, efficiency is already at level or better with Class D, only some aspects of the sound is worse or on level with Class A. But that is about to change now.
soongsc: You would see that if people were using really good loudspeakers. But with most normal loudspeakers in the 1000$ / box range you can't hear the difference.
Some considerations about class D and digital:
Assumed a switching transistor has a certain timing precision, then you can choose a slower time base and have the complete amplitude information in one PWM cycle or you can choose a faster timebase with limited information (8 bit is common) and use delta sigma modulation. In the second case you get a mixed average of the timing errors and the total error is reduced.
Assumed a switching transistor has a certain timing precision, then you can choose a slower time base and have the complete amplitude information in one PWM cycle or you can choose a faster timebase with limited information (8 bit is common) and use delta sigma modulation. In the second case you get a mixed average of the timing errors and the total error is reduced.
"Digital amps" (I personally hate this expression) often use low resolution PWM like 8 bits at a sampling rate higher than 44.1 ks/s. Combined with noise-shaping the necessary resolution at audio frequencies is achieved.
There are also pure 1-bit delta-sigma solutions around like the Sharp for instance.
Regards
Charles
There are also pure 1-bit delta-sigma solutions around like the Sharp for instance.
Regards
Charles
Lars Clausen said:
Hi Lars,
I have seen statements like this now so many times in several threads, so what's cooking? To me this starts to look like some marketing trick to make potential customers hungry. It would be nice if you could release at least a bit of info so that we are not kept totally in the dark and can start some real discussions on that breakthrough that you are promising us.
Best regards
Gertjan
matjans said:
matjans, we are on the Class D forum...😀
Nuuk said:
The 'new' cdp is for one of my secondary systems.
BTW maybe there's room for improvements of that PSU.
Maybe. 😉
Two things:
1.) Most class-D amps are not digital (none of them actually if the meaning of "digital" is taken seriously) at all.
2.) It should read: If you WANT to spend a lot of money don't consider a class-d amp.
Regards
Charles
1.) Most class-D amps are not digital (none of them actually if the meaning of "digital" is taken seriously) at all.
2.) It should read: If you WANT to spend a lot of money don't consider a class-d amp.
Regards
Charles
Now I'm getting more and more anxious to finish my AMP2 and listen to it. Just finished getting all those little specks soldered on praying that they're okay. ^_^!!!
Yes, that's been suggested by a number of more knowledgeable types than me! One SMPS 'expert' is going to have a look at them when he has completed his house move. 😉
If they can be imnproved, there are some of us who have heard them as standard who will be very excited! 😎
Nuuk said:
Heh, I was always amazed at how some Linn amps seem to drive any speaker you throw at them.
Much better than big bazooka monoblocks from other $$$$ brands.
The (good) switching PSUs they use surely are part of the secret. 😉
phase_accurate said:
In theory the 1 bit delta-sigma solutions are least sensitive for timing errors, but higher switching rate means more current. The 8 bit 380kHz introduced by TacT seems to be the best compromise (now even Sony use it, although they still support the 2.8Mhz SACD). I read about a Philips concept with eight phase-shifted 1 bit units running at 1/8 of 2.8 Mhz some years ago, but it seems to have disappeared in a drawer.
HI Guys,
I am already using my Amp3 with a pretty decent quailty SMPS and yes it does sounds excellent, but as Carlos and yourself later pointed out they must be room for improment. I am sure that even if swicth modes are the way to go there are better options than the current computer hardware we are using. I know have worked in this type of industry for years that most computer type psu, even in high grade servers arent built with what i would call quailty components. Caps wise they will be bog standard nichcons at best and the other elements must easily be improvable. I am sure like carlos says Linn use them for a reason and i am sure that there are light years away from what you get in servers and other IT kit. It is a different industry and unlike the stupidly competitive IT industry they have huge margins as so can afford more time in design and better components for production.
Dont get me wrong i think using PC based SMPS work stupidly good with the tripath based gear but i just feel that it would be possible to build better. Tought thing to desig i am sure, way beyond me but heres hoping.
Phil
I am already using my Amp3 with a pretty decent quailty SMPS and yes it does sounds excellent, but as Carlos and yourself later pointed out they must be room for improment. I am sure that even if swicth modes are the way to go there are better options than the current computer hardware we are using. I know have worked in this type of industry for years that most computer type psu, even in high grade servers arent built with what i would call quailty components. Caps wise they will be bog standard nichcons at best and the other elements must easily be improvable. I am sure like carlos says Linn use them for a reason and i am sure that there are light years away from what you get in servers and other IT kit. It is a different industry and unlike the stupidly competitive IT industry they have huge margins as so can afford more time in design and better components for production.
Dont get me wrong i think using PC based SMPS work stupidly good with the tripath based gear but i just feel that it would be possible to build better. Tought thing to desig i am sure, way beyond me but heres hoping.
Phil
SACD and beyond
Even though SACD has some serious problems its ultra high sample rate seems to average out their effect. Sonically I feel it to be significantly superior to the other formats. I really think the high sample rate is very important in preserving the original timing information. Filtering and noise shaping only go so far in reconstructing the original. I even think very high rate MP3 is not that bad. Some kinds of information are more important than others and timing is one.
Having said all that you ask what is the point? Sony has a new pro format that I have heard is being accepted in some of the major mastering labs and studios called something like “Supper DSD”. It is essentially SACD to 8 bits depth. This is really PCM at 8 bits and 2.8 MHz. I wanted to post a link, went back to find my sources and they are gone, lost in a disk crash. When technology reaches the point we can do switching amps at this frequency I think a true digital amp could actually work very well. This new format requires 8 times more storage space so don’t look for commercial versions any time soon. No doubt some interesting stuff.
Roger
el`Ol said:
Even though SACD has some serious problems its ultra high sample rate seems to average out their effect. Sonically I feel it to be significantly superior to the other formats. I really think the high sample rate is very important in preserving the original timing information. Filtering and noise shaping only go so far in reconstructing the original. I even think very high rate MP3 is not that bad. Some kinds of information are more important than others and timing is one.
Having said all that you ask what is the point? Sony has a new pro format that I have heard is being accepted in some of the major mastering labs and studios called something like “Supper DSD”. It is essentially SACD to 8 bits depth. This is really PCM at 8 bits and 2.8 MHz. I wanted to post a link, went back to find my sources and they are gone, lost in a disk crash. When technology reaches the point we can do switching amps at this frequency I think a true digital amp could actually work very well. This new format requires 8 times more storage space so don’t look for commercial versions any time soon. No doubt some interesting stuff.
Roger
- Status
- Not open for further replies.