 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.107.181.155
i searched, and there doesn't seem to be much love, or interest in class D amps here, but lately, a lot of other forums have shown interest in various sub $100 class D amps from the likes of SMSL, nobsound, sabaj, fiaxing, douk & FX audio etc.
i had little luck googling the topic, but did find one site that recommended 3 little amps, but without much description of sound quality.
i bought an original sonic impact amp and loved it, except that it was underpowered and prohibited sub use, and have a nice enough panasonic SAXR in storage, but right now, i'm looking to start building a CHEAP starter system until i can afford to get serious amplification.
does anyone know of any rave worthy (outside of amazon reviews) entry level amps i should look into specifically?
Follow Ups:
i just ordered a breeze audio TPA3116 yesterday. it might not appeal to all of your romantic "listen to jazz vocals with your feelers" types, but i've always loved the open, NEUTRAL, clarity of class D myself starting with the $20 sonic impact that blew my NAD so far out of the water it wasn't funny.it will be replacing my "just as dead & lifeless sounding as NAD" technics, & power the JBL northridges i picked up for $50 for the pair new until i upgrade to a sabaj Da3 DAC, try out a little dot MkII tube preamp and start the final system with a pair of SEALED (!!!!!!!!) philharmonic audio mini-philharmonitors and build a system around their sound.
in the short term, i'll be happy to finally get some treble air out of the JBLs which actually sound nice as/is at low volumes nearfield, but i just don't like warm, veiled, polite, forgiving, rolled off treble sound.
i gotta have my cowbells!
you'll NEVER hear diana krall or any of that other foofy demo muzack on my system! led zep? talking heads? george clinton? yep! a lot of that toe tapping dynamic type stuff and SOME big band, bachelor pad, world beat & oldies... but most "lowly pop".
Edits: 03/05/18
even with the limits of the gear i'm associating it with, the puny 12v .75a wall wart i'm powering it with, and the fact it's still breaking in probably... it INSTANTLY blew the technics away removing about a foot of sludge coating the proverbial window! i could finally hear cowbell transients and ambient air! the low level resolution is awesome! i can hear things much more clearly even at near whisper levels and no longer have to turn the volume up and STILL strain to hear movies at night.
i started a more detailed 1st impressions thread that i'll update after more break in, listening louder in the daytime, and after i get a real power supply, but using my xduo as a source after a few hours break in already gave me a very very nice (if maybe too lush for my tastes) sound that would even make a romantic paSS/tubes lover happy.
another cheap class D slays NAD and takes a dump on its fetid rotting corpse!
SMSL SA50 is great.
I own one, in my bedroom system, pushing some Isophon 88dB 12inch woofer vintage "bookshelves", it sounds great. i once carried it trough town in my backpack, to a friend's party who's amplifier had died. It pushed a pair of bookshelf speakers to party levels all night without a sweat. It really is a little bomb.
in my main system I own a fully modded (all passive components upgraded) Trends TA10.1 driving the mids and highs in an active-biamped configuration; It drives horns. Sounds fantastic without the hassle (and heat, and power consumption) of tubes.
they've been getting most of the current hype for their DACs & amps, but like other chinese "brands", seem to sell the same gear under different names.
i was beginning to think no-one here would "lower their standards" to even thinking about ANY class D, especially cheaper gear. my own experience, starting with my great sounding, but low powered sonic impact T amp is that class D offers the most hi fi bang for the buck by a magnitude... it just sounds so open, detailed and dynamic in transients without any grain, though it can sound a little thin on speakers that lean towards detailed and clinical.
all 4 of the last amps i've bought have been class D, but even back when i bought my panasonic SA-XR, i noticed some foaming at the mouth hate towards class D i don't think it deserves.
no... it doesn't sound thick, lush or appeal to one's emotions, but to me... THAT's the very strength of class D... getting out of the way and telling you almost exactly what your source sounds like which used to be considered a good thing... aka "straight wire with gain".
if you want more warmth & emotion... get it from your source, or use a tube preamp.
to my ears, class D sounds "the most natural" by not smearing ANY frequencies or having any kind of "tone". it sounds flat, fast & detailed to me... the same things that drew me to acoustic suspension minimonitors
I never used my Trends without a good preamp. I dont know how it sounds like as a standalone unit ; i would suspect it would sound thinner - but probably even more lucid and transparent. A good preamp goes a long way to correct the "faults" of those little T-amps; a little bit of tweaking (coupling caps etc) does wonders as well, and let's not forget: a good linear regulated PSU to replace the 3$ smps wall wart, and you get a sound that's both more clean and more relaxed (see my other post).
The SMSL I use it as a standalone unit - in a less demanding application - and it's fantastic, I love it. About to buy a second one, for a mini home-studio, powering some vintage Beovox C40. Cute as hell.
absolutely! i've seen a few 1 star amazon reviews for little chinese amps lamenting the lack of output, but i bet a nickel those that are complaining are clueless and are trying to get 80+ watts out of tiny wall warts.
in the long thread i read years ago about the TBI millenia, power supplies made a noticeable difference with batteries coming out as sounding best.
when i'm ready to upgrade my starter system and replace the technics i don't particularly like, i'm planning on getting a meanwell regulated power supply (along with a power conditioner) which will hopefully offer decent enough power that noise etc. isn't an issue.
class D seems sensitive to line noise. i heard some people complaining about low level high frequency squealing out of panasonic receivers, but never noticed it myself... maybe because of my NHT soft domes and getting a power conditioner before my more resolving energy RC10s.
class D needs both quality and quantity in power supplies, but if i recall, a lot of people were using lower voltages with TBIs to get a softer warmer sound out of them, but the tech generally craves higher voltages, up to at least 48v for some high powered modules.
i'm thinking of getting a 20v 5a power supply as i've seen at least one person preferring a 15v or 18v supply over a 24v they tried on their 3116, but will run it by the community to see what everyone thinks. lower voltage will mean lower power, but power is no good if sound quality suffers.
apparently, they use the same chips as the highly respected $500 TBI millenia! i was interested in them for a bit, except 32wpc is NOT enough power to live with long term, especially if your an acoustic suspension mini-monitor lover like me, but $50-$60 for a "poor man's TBI" after getting a regulated power supply?
THAT falls into MY definition of "giant killing" (aka bang for the buck)
the TBI had a COUPLE favorable reviews, including one at 6 moons, if i remember right. it was NOT a slouch, as long as you can live with 32wpc.
a $30 "knock off" will be GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME while i build the rest of my system starting with a temporary DAC & maybe little dot MkII (if needed) before getting really serious with my system.
i imagine the TBI has a little better attention to detail, as it should for $500... but being able to get the same chip... MOST OF THE SOUND, for less than 10% is hurling rocks at ogre eyes in my book.
CRAP! i made a pic showing the half dozen rebranded 3116s i could find, but apparently didn't save it on my thumb drive. the same amp (apparently) is available with various case colors as:
breeze audio
fosi
K. GuSS
nobsound
weiliang
&
yeeco
$30 TBI millenias? WOW!
I use such an amp in mymini Maggie office system. NSMT amp. Quite nice.
At the risk of any pretense of holding any audiophile credentials, I urge an audition of Crown's XLS DriveCore amps, which are quite powerful. I gather Crown worked with TI on quite a bit of R and D for these amps. I have one, and have had good experience with it.
if i needed that much power, i WOULD get crowns, and they were my 1st choice for a DJ rig i started building that's in storage in another state. they're pretty competively priced compared to berhinger & peavey class D etc. too. i've seen a lot of favorable mentions of crown class D.
back to 3116 amps, here's the pic i intended to post along with the two reviews for the 3116 based (?) TBI millenia
honestly... i think some of the backlash against class D... ESPECIALLY CHEAP class D is more snobbery than personal experience. all 4 of my last amps have been class D... sonic impact, panasonic SA-XR, planet audio 4 channel car amp & a BASH 500w sub plate. i love them all.
the TBI reviews...
TNT audio
http://www.tnt-audio.com/ampli/3_mini_amps_e.html
positive feedback
https://positive-feedback.com/Issue62/millenia.htm
i literally i don't have (library computer) time to read this thread which has already gotten quite large.i think everyone misunderstood my use of the term "giant killing".
i didn't mean it in an absolute "these amps are CLEARLY better than real high end amps" way, but more in a little engine that could overachieving, ACCEPTABLE in a serious system kind of way.
just wanted to clear that up. based on WHAT I'VE READ, NOT personal experience, before another troll goes on misquoting me, hypex N core class D modules REALLY ARE "take all comers giant killers"
to expect that level of performance from a $40 amp is ridiculous, but as a class D convert, i CAN believe a well made CHEAP class D amp can easily better a lot of $1,000ish amps, ESPECIALLY if you're a speed & detail freak like me and don't like thick/veiled/lush sound
heck, i didn't particularly care for the sound of vandersteen 5As driven by a hotrodded mc cormack amp with a dragonfly 1.0. it WAS very beautiful sounding, especially on light jazz & female vocals (standard BORING audiphile fodder) but as a percussionist at heart, was just too thickj sounding for MY TASTES as i like the ruthless kind of detail in the treble that lets cowbells & metallic percussion poke you in the ear hard.
class D excels at that, but CAN also sound sterile if it's mated to speakers with high level treble resolution... especially aluminum domes.
i have a cowbell bias...
there i said it!
LOLas a percussionist at heart, i also demand AT LEAST the tight thumping bass of acoustic suspension (maggies are BETTER, by MY priorities) and loath the flatulent distortion that puts the pun in bass reflex when you drop the "B"
i JUST came up with that ANALogy.
sorry... i couldn't resist
Edits: 01/06/18 01/06/18 01/06/18 01/06/18
In the sense I think you mean, I suspect the TDA-1 might qualify. I got mine thru Parts Express, the last holdout of real high end!
Wall Wart, yep. and all of maybe 8 watts per side, suitable for mainly high sensitivity speakers. If I wern't satisfied with the current sound, I'd experiment wiht the 8AA cell built-in option.
i think for 32$ to my door, it was quite the bargain. The iPod input sure doesn't hurt, and it serves well in my GARAGE.
Too much is never enough
Agree 100% that modern class D offer the possibility of high sound quality & power in a substantially less costly format. And the clarity of good ones is remarkable. Btw, for your case, I have often found my most expensive audio purchases are those which were too cheap or compromised. Because I really, in my heart, wanted something better and I end up wasting time and money.
For you, save your shekels and get a freaking nCore when you can and be done with it!!!!
I'm running one (yes, NAD, and it is not at all syrupy, to the contrary) on big Maggies. Percussion is great, and power is fantastic.
I found the NAD M22 to have better upper high frequency response than a B&O ICE amp, and both of those had clearer midranges than a good AB amp.
well... that would take too long and deprive me of music HERE & NOW. i'm listening to decent enough JBL 6 1/2" outdoor speakers on way too thick sounding vintage technics power, and want to start building a system one upgrade at a time, starting with cheap gear... a breeze audio (like that name better than nobsound, weiliang, yeeco, K. GuSS or fosi... particularly as "air" and how much better class D delivers it is a top priority), a little dot MkII (to test if tubes are friends or the sludgy foes i've always avoided like the plague), a sabaj DA3 DAC & the miniphilharmonitors i lust after... to keep incrementally improving my system as well as gauging exactly what direction to go for the "final system".if i wait until i can afford N cores (IF mini phils aren't starving for lushness) i'll be listening to a "barely entry level" system a long time.
i still worry that class D might not mate well with ruthlessly RAAL ribbons. my NHT superzero soft domes were starved for detail even AFTER driving them with my panasonic SA-XR, but the excellent (i'd argue B&W quality) aluminum dome tweeter proved to sound a bit dry & clinical on the same amp and acquired an even more liquid sound than NHT/panasonic driven by an entry level cambridge stack.
i want to familiarize myself with mini phils (and likely hyperdetailed gustard X22) which i'm HOPING will be life mates before committing to ANY amp tech. RAALs, ESS9038, & class D might be "too much clinical" even with a tube preamp. i love speed & detail, but not when it turns into a dry & mechanical sound so that water drums 1 doesn't sound real any more as it did on my NHTs.
besides... as an avid hifi bargain hunter, i want to be able to report on the "cheap gear" which might potentially be satisfying enough with RAAL ribbons and the first "real" DAC i've ever owned.
if only my NHTs had dayton (formerly MB quart) tianium dome tweeters... i think i wouldn't have felt the need to upgrade. heck... i could even have lived with my energy RC10s on any track BUT water drums one if it wasn't for their flimsy cereal box cabinets driving me nuts once the distortion holes were plugged. i despise resonance more than anything.
i'm STILL struggling to find work in one of the worst economies in the country. even little upgrades are a down the road proposition.
Edits: 01/17/18
To reap all the benefits of 'd', you will end up with a more complex and expensive SMPS. This has a few upsides, one of which is the light weight packaging is preserved.
Too much is never enough
Notice they are in a box except for modified Lepai done by NMST Loudspeakers. Sounds pretty decent and it's fine for desktop duty.
Most of these bargain basement amps are sold by internet hype. I also have five Sonic Impact originals from years ago (most hyped amp, ever). (Well, four. Don't ever mix the polarity of your power source or *poof*.)
Most amps sound dull to me but when you invoke their tone controls everything goes completely to hell. These are made for amp-only duty. Bring tone controls (if you must) from a preamp or computer. Z Reviews has featured a few of such amps. The guy is total entertainment and he seems to love all the consumer grade kit out there.
from all i've read about lepai amps... pretty much anything else is better, and right now, it seems that 3116 amps are the "best buy". they use the same chips as $500 TBI millenia amps, and that amp got respect from TNT & positive feedback as well as people over at headfi.
i want a breeze audio amp so bad now that i know it's basically a TBI knock off for a fraction of the price. i wanted a TBI myself for a while except for the fact 32wpc is not going to be enough for an acoustic suspension minimonitor lover for long.
again... i think a LOT of hate for class D, in general, is from people who prefer a warm & lush tubes/NAD/mc intosh/marantz kind of sound than a neutral/clinical one, which isn't fair as they'd have similar sentiments about a lot of uncolored gear.
i tend to HATE thick & warm sound which, TO ME, sounds "dull and lifeless" like turning the air in a room into syrup.
blaming class D for lack of euphonics just isn't fair. try putting a tube amp in front of one and THEN see if class D is capable of reporting THAT sound faithfully.
everyone seems to have forgotten that many years ago, when halcro 1st generation class D amps came out, many reviewers were raving they were "the best in the world".
So there should be thousands of these amps around, built in high end systems, in reviewers' systems, to be used as a high bar for a reference point. But the last time I've heard them mentioned or seen them in print was...geez, I don't know..., over 10 years ago, maybe.
Why is that, if it is the best and reviewers are still climbing ever higher in the price ranges for amplification? It's nothing to read about $50-$150K amps from Air Tight, Constellation, VAC, Lamm, Boulder, CH, Soulution, anymore. Might be considered a bargain by now! 8-)
well, i'm sure a big part of that was that they stopped making sonic impacts soon after they started getting popular. i bought mine for $20 just when the price was starting to climb, and in less than a year, if i remember right, they were gone, and came back a year later as black dayton amps which i think are gone too.i don't trust magazine reviews when all of their bias is towards expensive gear... namely the same gear that buys their advertising and there IS a "pay to play rule" in said propaganda. i found that out talking to a shop owner who had his own product that no-one would review unless he bought advertising.
besides that, i tend to think of expensive hifi gear as a ripoff because it wasn't $4,000 klipsch lascalas, big tinfoil sounding maggies, or $1,000 JBL etc. towers etc. that got me into hifi... it was a $100 pair of infinities that blew my mind with their speed, detail, imaging, and total lack of either port or cabinet resonances. i still think acoustic suspension sub/sat is the only correct way to build a cone based system after that... and see a conspiracy to suppress acoustic suspension because it proves that big sloppy bass ported speakers with cabinets that fail the knock test are a ripoff.
i'm biased AGAINST expensive gear though i have heard smaller maggies sound gorgeous on tubes... B&W 800s on mc intosh sound laid back & detailed (if not thump with conviction) and vandersteen 5As sound lovely, but way too thick & lush for my tastes on mc cormack with an original 9giant killing... non digital sounding) audioquest dragonfly...
the dragonfly impressed me the most there! LOL
Edits: 01/17/18
........ so many Inmates fell for a Troll who brags about his "500 watt bicycle system".
Gimme an effin break!
SB
excuse me Y9U TROLL!i never claimed my trailer system to be the last word in state of the art sound! crap... the mains have plastic cabinets and PORTS for pete's sake!!!
as a PORTABLE system, yeah... it SHOULD be pretty nice for STREET PARTYING!
listening to the proels nearfield with the planet audio plate was plenty satisfying at low levels. i've noticed that the amp and/or speakers strain at volume having used the system a couple times without the sub, and THAT is THE FIRST report of the system IN ACTION.
you must be another one of those effing annoying port lovers who get their feelers hurt whenever anyone dares to speak THE TRUTH that acoustic suspension IS superior for definition and that the TUNED RESONANCE of ports is A FORM OF DISTORTION.
get over yourself you factually challenged emotional midget!
i've heard B&W 800s on mc intosh (superior treble), vandersteen 5As on hotrodded mc cormack (too thick & lush for my tastes with a dragonfly 1.0), maggie MG12s on tubes (VERY high palpability!), klipsh la scalas on whatever, as well as big maggies sounding like tinfoil or recently driving me out of a room with their hard treble playing my harvest DSotM CD, so i know what both good and bad sound is along with the dozens and dozens of consumer level combos and gear i've owned over the years.
i don't fib! i might not share YOUR audio priorities, or pathetic (bet you're a trump lover) need for social hierarchies, but i tell the truth about EVERYTHING and ALWAYS frame MY PERSPECTIVE as being a detail & speed freak.
i've always admitted the limitations of my own system eg. NHTs can sound beautiful & image effortlessly (better than far faster, airier & palpable maggie MG12s in the specificity department), but lack low level resolution in the hights that can't match GOOD maggies or B&W or that the "upgrade" to energy RC10s gave my system resolution that fears no $1,000 B&Ws or paradigms, especially with their vile DISTORTION HOLES (hope your snowflake eyelid's twitching over that) plugged, BUT had flimsy cabinets that gave them a boxy sound that in the end make superzeros preferable DESPITE their sins of omission in the treble as sins of ADDITION (resonance, overhang & distortion etc.) are far worse.
yeah... trust a TROLL who uses STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS and personal attacks to CHANGE THE SUBJECT who has no evidence ON THE SUBJECT of their own to add to the discussion.
what are YOUR class D credentials TROLL?
"look! look! he has a commoner bicycle system that threatens the cars are kings of the road social order! how dare he challenge MY sense of superiority with all the expensive baubles i wasted my money on? little class D amps? i just know they suck because they're cheap and made in china! stop challenging my fragile sense of self worth! everybody gang up on him! he rides a bike! HE BUYS CHEAP GEAR! HE'S A SCARY OUTSIDER!!!"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
it must be sad to feel so easily threatened by facts that challenge one's world view.
FACT: class D DOES tend to really do details well, both in the treble AND especially in the bass where it has a stellar damping factor grip advantage over MOST amps except really expensive ones
FACT: class D amps generally (haven't heard them all, just mine) are NOT polite and forgiving sounding and on highly resolving speakers CAN sound clinical.
like i said in another reply... i have a theory that those who prefer "lush sound" are more EMOTIONAL as they always seem to talk about how gear "makes them feel" where speed & detail freaks like myself NEVER talk about how gear feels, but how it sounds. i find it ironic that a troll with a personal axe to grind brings NO FACTS of consequence to the table and uses an emotion based personal attack to try and make a point.
like C+C music facory said...
"things that make you go hmmmm..."
Edits: 01/06/18
Trump is the best thing that happened to America is decades. Man brought China to its knees without firing a single round.
TROLL
SB
regarding the SMSL SA-90, one reviewer claims:[quote]"This one is clearly better in every way than the older tripath ones. I also compared it to my beloved Pass Labs XA 30.5 amp, which costs about 100x. It get's surprising close in most ways. "
"...this is better than anything I've heard for less than $2,500. Really - can't believe it."
"Compared to a couple tube amps - 845 and a Jadis KT90, it is still very close. Not quite as warm in the midrange and the imaging isn't quite as perfect - but really good and better than some cheap tube amps like Yaqin I've owned in the past."[/quote]
THAT sure looks like a "giant killing rave" to me. comparing a $60 box to a pa$$ labs, using a P$ audio DAC?! that's some heavy hitting stuff, and, as another review i read somewhere stated that the OP liked the sound of his yaquin quinpo ($200) better than a very well respected rogue sphinx integrated, (maybe for warmth over detail, while this reviewer, like me, prefers the opposite), and this reviewer likes his mini better than yaquin, MAYBE the SMSL SA-60 isn't an amp to sneeze at. i'm not stating that as a fact, but as a distinct possibility.
from:
https://www.reddit.com/r/audiophile/comments/2t2uwm/tripath_2020_vs_ti_tpa3116_vs_a_bunch_of_highend/as i said in another reply, my $20 (price paid after the underground buzz over a $12 "toy") sonic impact ran circles around my "reputed giant killing NAD" in the ease, detail, transients, and ESPECIALLY imaging & air departments. after that experience, i'm inclined to give cheap class D a chance, especially as the tech's more than a decade old, and improvements have been made.
i was also wondering, as i wasted apparently ALL of my phone data trying to research "mini-amps", piecing dispararte sourced reviews together, just how many of YOU naysayers have actually LISTENED to a good true entry level class D amp. it's easy to look down your nose at cheap made in china amps when you have the proverbial "5 grand stereo" mentioned in "holiday in cambodia", but way back in the day, SOME people that had such big ticket gear fell in love with their T-amps and preferred them over their tube amps.
i can't vouch for T-amps destroying audio research etc. gear, but NAD? yep! buh bye you sloppy wet blanket over my speakers sounding piece of soft dome smothering junk! then again, back in the 80s, harmon kardon, yamaha & even pioneer owned muffled sounding NAD too as far as i'm concerned. "better than sony" isn't high praise in my book. LOL
i didn't have time to go through all the replies last time, and won't again next (this) time, but i'm anticipating a lot of "not much help" the same way everyone tried to change the subject to horns in a thread i created trying to suss what a 20w rated ribbon can handle in a real world system. it seems the elders here don't want to be bothered acknowledging nice sounding dirt cheap class D amps even exist.
i keep seeing topping getting dusted by the new jack amps, and THOSE were getting a LOT of respect in various reviews at places like 6 moons and stereo mojo where us cheapskates hang out.
i like class D from my former (blown in a bike system) sonic impact to my 70wpc real world panasonic 5.1 receiver to my $120 planet audio 4 channel car plate in between. i like the ease and ESPECIALLY the speed & detail in the bass & treble, so i WILL be dumping my thick "frowny face EQ sounding" technics for a crisp mini, which will likely be the nobsound TPA3116 for the $20 savings and titanium grey case, though i saw ANOTHER variant selling for just $35 in blue under the yeeco name, but blue doesn't look too high end, even for a temporary stepping stone amp that will start and end as a PC amp.
SOME DAY, i want to do the Ncore thing, but that'll be after i save enough money to move out of here, and traveling light with a nobsound is another bonus. the tired old technics will be gifted. (i still think it's leeching energy turned off)
a couple other reviews by "high enders" praised the SMSL SA50 and there were some happy campers that considered the nobsound (and fosi) to be serious upgrades too at amazon. i'm biased to believe them over naysayers who only have unsubstatiated doubts. i KNOW sub $30 class D can kick butt from EXPERIENCE... and that's in plastic cases with 1/8" ins and LOUSY spring loaded terminals. even if these new higher powered minis can't come close to matching T-amp sound, and i don't see why they shouldn't after a few generations, the new crop are built much more sturdy & sexy. the money i save will be to get miniphilharmonitors ASAP, and THEN i can decide if i want to stick with class D, or "go warm" with A/B.
i'll report on my experience so the haters can dismiss it down the road, as they did with my panasonic SA-XR reviews and raves... a godsend for superzeros, though a bit lean on energy RC10s.
glad to see THIS thread has sparked some interest & debate. i'll be reading EVERYTHING back home later tonight as an hour's nowhere near enough time to reply to this big a thread
Edits: 01/02/18 01/02/18
Yup, the SMSL SA-90 is so good, it's not available anymore. You may have missed 40% of the reviews which are one star, like:
"Firstly this amp begins clipping at cuts out at volumes that the lepy cruises right on past. Both amps tend to clip when driving my 8 ohm klipsch speakers which I have a couple different models of but the lepy does so at far higher volumes then the smsl . When driving 4 ohm klipsch satellites the lepy drives them far past comfortable volumes and the smsl wimps out again. All the small amps I've tested do a way better job with 4 ohm speakers likely due to less resistance on their digital circuitry but the lepy leaves this amp in the dust."
That doesn't sound like a Pass amp to me!
But maybe it's a big-ticket-amp conspiracy: couldn't have them around because they were sooo close in sound, so drove 'em out of business! Just like the gov't and carburetors that ran on water! 8-)
your conspiracy theory has some NEW evidence... i just noticed this trying to find a decent pair of $20 headphones after my $50 got ruined when the cable grommet snapped at the earcup
file under WTF?!!
Lol ,
Reading those 1&2 star ratings were hillarious ..! The reviewer comparing it to his Pass Amp should be tasered, at least twice , before being run out of town ...
:)
what about the reviewer who says the amps compare FAVORABLY to pa$$ labs?
Efficient, easy load speakers in a small room and they will work quite well to some extent. But a decent used integrated Class A/B amp from ebay for $100 will walk all over one of those little Class D devices.
The o/p asked to name a class D amp that will stay with the big boys....the Merrill will. Check it out.... excellent unit with no apologies to Audio Research, Threshold, etc.
actually, what i said, what everyone else took literally, was REALLY
"anyone know of any overachieving CHEAP class D amps that won't be embarrassed by $1,000ish class A?B that are worthy as temporary stepping stones until i get my miniphilharmonitors and gustard DAC and get an idea of what the system needs in terms or clinical/lush balance to finalize my amplification down the road?"
i was using a bit of hyperbole.
ith that in mind, i DO consider class D to actually BE a giant killing tech as i'm an acoustic suspension & cowbell lover who demands low level resolution for percussion which class D does do better than class A/B at a given price point and then some ($500 TBI millenia is considered true high end by many) with hypex N cores being the TRUE "take all comers" giant killers from all the reviews i've read in an N core tour thread at headfi, a mola mola review, and a review for some other N core based big buck amp.
taking the DIY route, one can essentially get a $10,000 N core amp for around $1,500 in parts.
i don't expect ANY $40 amp to play at that level, but 80-90% of it isn't shabby for a temporary starter system AND i've loved all 3 class D amps i've owned for their detail "unveiling" and grip on bass & treble. i expect to get AT LEAST sonic impact level sound out of one and a lot of people WERE liking their T-amps more than their jolidas etc back in the day.
apparently everyone here missed that memo.
Look up the Merrill Veritas. This one is a giant killer. I haven't heard other other amps that is this good. Only a trace of class D....but only a trace. All others are flat, dead, and unmusical in comparison. Class D is getting better all the time, but just like electric cars....still too new.
Try this. I use this in my study with Mini Maggie's. NSMT amp.
Erol doing amplifiers now , interesting .......
I simply LOVE my Parts Express DTA-1 which might be 8 watts or less per side.
Perfect garage amp.
It can run on a wall-wart or 8xAA batteries.
On/Off volume control and cheap-o spring/clip speaker wire connectors. 31$ delivered when I bought.
Too much is never enough
OK... now that i'm home, and not rushed for time on a library computer, i can add SOMETHING to the discussion, even if it's 2nd hand rumors.the NOW DELETED review at:
http://www.valuehifi.net/best-buy-recommendations.html#indeedtda
claimed that the indeed TDA7498E @ $140 ($100ish street, i think) is
"the best" amp and claimed 160wpc (or was it total?) according to an old bookmark i saved.somewhere, someone claimed it's "the same" as a fiaxing (aka FX audio) FX1002A which apperently is a favorite for modding and op amp swaps by the DIY crowd, but it looks nothing like one, though it does look like the SMSL. like S.M.S.L., FX audio has a lot of amp variants. my notes mention the FX502A at 50wpc for some reason along with saving a pic of a TDA7498 which looks identical to the 1002A. all i know is there was SOME forum buzz over fiaxings a year or so ago. (there's so much spam trying to get to decent reviews in forums, and far to few users that can be bothered to post reviews with more than 2-3 adjectives) if nothing else... i like the nagra style "slotted" power switches that are probably more practical than spring loaded push buttons on tiny amps.
in trying to keyword search "best cheap class D amps", i stumbled on a page i don't particularly trust as it chose two amps with tone controls, though it did bring the fosi audio "brand" to my attention and after seeing the TDA3116 getting a 4.5@74 reviews on amazon, i keyword searched THAT, and stumbled on a forum shootout review that claimed the TPA 3116 (a re-branded nobsound variant? looks identical & has same number in its name) bested a sure TK2050, a topping, a meanwell (?), and a lepai.
i don't know how much weight to give that review as it was done on cheap dayton & pioneer speakers, but the reviewer seems committed to cheap gear. i'm only looking for a temporary starter amp until i upgrade, either to a high end amp, or a parasound Z amp intermediary depending on how well the SEALED miniphilharmonitors i have my heart set on mate with class D.
my original "final system" plan was to DIY a "super rogue sphinx" using nCores, slagle autoformers and either hotrodding a grounded grid or building an aikido tube preamp or buffer, and testing the concept with a cheap class D amp with an upgrade to a little dot MkII tube preamp, unless the system sounds so good i don't feel the need to upgrade.
as far as the 3116s go, nobsound is a $20 better deal than fosi if the two amps are really the same.
S.M.S.L. (amp has same styling as the indeed) seems to becoming the "hot underground value brand" for amps and DACs in particular. i've seen gear that looks just like that brand under other names like douk maybe and imagine half a dozen "brands" might be the same thing in different packaging. i think i made a note about the SA50 after it was recommended along with the two amps that had tone controls, but it's a looker at the very least with its nice pushbutton power switch.
finally... a questionable contender is the micca origain which is rated 4.5 at amazon, but with only 6 reviews. it looks kind of brit high end in a naim nait/cyrus sorta way even if the volume control is the power switch apparently.i didn't have the time to copy nobsound & fosi 3116 reviews today (as i'm writing this) but intend to and for now, the $40 nobsound is at the top of my list for its price, decent looks (i like the titanium grey) and at 50wpc... will tell me if it's worth looking into a 45wpc parasound as a next step amp while considering a rogue sphinx, R1 preamp (for vinyl) & odyssey khartago, or the nCore DIY integrated.
hopefully this fuzzy info helps the discussion. i'm HOPING there's a cheap amp at least as good sounding as a sonic impact or topping if not a $500 TBI millenia that's not in my future with low 80dB minis.
for anyone looking for a 45wpc integrated "final amp" under $300, the class A/B emotiva A100 at just $230 is supposed to be really nice sounding, if a roadblock to incremental amp/preamp upgrades, or mono bridgeable like "bulletproof" parasound 45wpc/90w bridged Z amps which hover close to $100 used, and supposedly are both detailed AND sweet sounding at the same time. it's POSSIBLE i might skip past cheap class D and get a Z amp to see if i want to bridge a pair, try an odyssey, or go back to class D which i like on more forgiving speakers if not clinical ones, but the JBL outdoor speakers i got a deal on and am starting my next system with really could use a damping factor detail boost over the maximum forgiveness old technics driving them now.
Edits: 12/30/17
I've read good things about Nuprime amps. They have 90W stereo amp bridgeable to mono for $400.http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=NPSTA6
Edits: 12/30/17
yes, i'm familiar with both nuprime and nuforce, but $400 is both out of my budget, and an upgrade block as they're integrated amps. for now, i'm just looking for a CHEAP (for ME, cheap = $50ish) temporary amp until i start upgrading. before investing in a nuprime, i'd just get a use parasound Z amp for about $120 and use my DAC as a preamp, and if the Z amp is as sweet sounding, detailed and spacious as a review claimed, keep it and buy a second for mono bridging or even dual mono bi-amping don the road.
$400 is too much for a stepping stone amp, but the reviews i've read for nuforce and it's nuprime spinoff gear have been favorable, if noting a bit of dryness in the sound.
getting up to that range, the 32wpc TPI millenia used to be described as an over the top giant killer a few years ago. i considered one back then, but as the miniphilharmonitors i have my heart set on are low 80dB efficient, probably even 50wpc in't going to cut it for medium level listening.
There are good to very good Class-D amps but non a Giant Killer. .. NORD seems to offer the best value vs performance ....
Regards
yeah, but that's not a BUDGET amp. i kind of have my heart set on a, autoformer/aikido or hotrodded grounded grid/N core final system, but for now just want to take the dreaded lead out of my technics.
i would argue FIERCELY that the cheap PLASTIC original $15 sonic impact was a TOTAL giant killer. i bought one, and it DESTROYED my overrated NAD by a 1,000 mile margin and bettered my onkyo too, a bit, if not had the same horsepower.
just like the $100 infinity RS1000s that destroyed larger $peaker$ with their speed, imaging, lack of resonance, and bass TIGHTNESS, i'm a class D advocate after the T amp won me over for the same reasons. euphonic thickness just sounds wrong to me. where's the air? where are the transients?
So you liked it better than ONE Chinese made crappy class AB amp. So what?? This doesn't make it a giant killer because that would assume the NAD was a giant...
again... everyone is taking "giant killing" too literally here and viewing it in absolute score keeping terms instead of the "insane bang for the buck" way i intended.NAD has long had a reputation for giant killing, so a little cheap amp that TOTALLY destroys an alleged giant killer (killing a giant killer) is an apt analogy as far as i'm concerned.
while i don't know exactly WHAT (all?) component in a dragonfly 1.0/hot rodded mc cormack DNA/vander$teen 5A signal chain was causing the system to sound so thick and lush... i'd take ANY class D amp i've owned and my energy RC10s (if they didn't have flimsy cabinets that resonate when you plug their distortion holes) over THAT $25,000+ system.
the system DID sound lovely, especially on vocals, but i'm a percussionist who needs bass that THUMPS (not booms) and treble that doesn't soften cowbells like the 5A system did and generally avoid vocals in favor of instrumentals. it just sounded thick & muffled, like NAD, to me.
for MY speed & details craving tastes, i can easily imagine a (better DAC than even CURRENT dragonflies) sabaj DA3/breeze audio TPA3116/miniphilharmonitor system slaying THAT $27,000 dragon with a more open and airy sound for about $1,000 after buying a laptop versus that lush sound that just wasn't to my liking at all.
THAT's why i'm drawn to class D, just like acoustic suspension & planars etc... speed & detail which = getting out of the way of the signal as far as i'm concerned. lush = thick & distorted to MY ears.
i imagine that speed & detail freaks are in the minority... that's OK... but i'm out to slay DIFFERENT giants than those that like that thick sludgy (blech!) sound.
i got into an argument with some troll who lost his mind because $1,200 maggie MG12s sound more realistic (ESPECIALLY in the bass!) than B&W 800s to me, convinced that somehow i was unquestionably wrong and that their OPINION (and tastes) was absolutely right. to me... the millisecond you slow transients down, you've committed blasphemy no matter if it tickles some people emotionally. (lies tend to do that! LOL)
i'll bet $20 here and now that maggie MG12s TOTALLY DESTROY bowers on a waterfall plot... the MOST IMPORTANT test for ANY driver by my tastes, but i prefer quality over quantity... especially when it's at the expense of DISTORTION (aka tuned RESONANCE, aka porting)
the very thing some seem to hate so much about class D (and acoustic suspension)... namely telling it like it is without euphonics is the very thing i love about it. it's hard to have an argument with anyone speaking a different language
Edits: 01/19/18
The E-Bay cheapies will sell just fine to those who believe the inflated power ratings.
You can't get 100wpc continuous average power both channels driven into 8 ohms 20Hz-20kHz with less than .05%THD in a package little bigger than a pack of cigarettes (class D or otherwise).
I'm looking for my next class-D amplifier. I already have a 20 watt cheapie with preamp and all in a reasonable case. I think I need a little more power and will try some 50-watt variant, maybe without preamp this time. I'm trying to make a three-channel system out of a two-channel system. It seems it shouldn't be rocket science to do so. I do find the center channel helpful for dialogue and presence, but am unwilling to compromise two-channel performance. I see nothing wrong with class-D for home theater.
i think those of us who love class D are more in the "clinical detail freak" camp than the "lush & liquid" crowd.
class D & acoustic suspension sounds sterile to them, while ports & tubes sound thick & distorted to us, or at least me.
system balance counts though.
NHT superzero x NAD = bad, lifeless wet blanket sound
NHT superzero x panasonic SA-XR = ALMOST acceptable cowbells
energy RC10 x SA-XR = hyperdetailed, slightly analytical sound that LITERALLY, and pun intended, doesn't sound as believably liquid as NHT/SA-XR on baka forest people's water drums 1, but kicks much butt on ALL percussion (a top priority for me)
energy RC10 x cambridge audio = beautiful easygoing, slightly lush, sound ignoring the RC10's chose your poison... port resonance, or cabinet resonance plugged no win scenario
Well if you are making up your own group data , the results is whatever you say it is ..:)
I don't think any of the real cheapies are going to be the 'giant killers'.
However, this manufacturer has a long and well regarded following for reasonable to low money: http://www.classdaudio.com/
And then, there are class D amps from ATI (which is a serious builder). I use a NAD M22 which sounds great, but it is not a cheapie, no nCore is.
Buy it.. Build it..
https://www.neurochrome.com/modulus-86-rev-2-0/
i'd "upgrade" to a $120 or so parasound Z amp, which i'm considering as my middle upgrade, after trying class D with a $200 little dot MkII tube preamp (baby rogue sphinx) before that.
i'm planning on MAYBE an N core/aikido or grounded grid/autoformer final "integrated" or a rogue R1/odyssey khartago (for the phono preamp) and am just looking to get rid of my soaking wet blanket panasonic, and to get a taste of how miniphilharmonitors groove with class D before building a final system around them
If your budget is under $400 and you're willing to go used, and you will have low efficiency sealed speakers (Philharmonic Audio seems like a great company), then more likely, fullsize older typical class AB amplifiers are more likely to be available and appropriate.
I would look at these:
http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649395689-bampk-reference-1252-2-channel-reference-power-amplifier/
http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649391951-parasound-hca1200-power-amp-205wpc/
http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649388267-adcom-gfa5400/
> I use a NAD M22 which sounds great, but it is not a cheapie, no nCore is.
I don't think the M22 uses nCore. Certainly the M2 doesn't and neither does the M32 - they use a DDFA built under license from Zetex.
See this white paper from NAD relating to the M2 - http://www.goodwinshighend.com/manufacturers/nad/M2-white-paper-EU-Web.pdf
Do correct me if I'm mistaken, but I use the M32 and presume the M22 has a similar amplifier to the earlier M2 and the later M32.
everything i've read about N core, in a headfi thread where a member's N cores made a tour, and in a mola mola review gives me the impression that N cores are contenders for best (as in zero coloration) amplifiers in the world.
i became a class D fan after my "silly little $15 sonic impact T amp" ran lightning fast circles around my sluggish NAD, and have a nice panasonic SA-XR in storage i'd use if it wasn't in another state.
being a class D convert already, N core is a very tempting "final system" goal and i'm considering pairing those with slagle autoformers and either a grounded grid hotrodded with the slagles or an aikido tube buffer or preamp as the "ultimate, take THAT solution/pass etc!" giant killing integrated.
BTW... if autoformers are the best volume controls, why aren't they in EVERY integrated over $2,000?
> ...gives me the impression that N cores are contenders for best (as in zero coloration) amplifiers in the world.
A good module doesn't make a good amp.
I was impressed by a fellow Avantgarde owner who was raving about his digital Benchmark AHB-2, so much so that I bought one. This was my biggest ever amplifier mistake. It is quite possibly very accurate, has no colourisation and is dead quiet, but it's also dead boring! It is an amplifier where I was inclined to turn down the volume, instead of turning it up. That's about as bad as it gets! It tended to render exciting music as dull as elevator music.
I'm not suggesting that this is the fault of the chip (THX's AAA also considered as the best by many) as it is a highly respected module, but it doesn't necessarily make a good amplifier.
Furthermore I know that many people like the Benchmark, but if you CAREFULLY read worthwhile reviews (where it's partnered with a number of speakers) you'll note that it is very speaker dependent.
FWIW, though, the AHB2 isn't a digital or a Class D amp.
It's a low-bias Class A/B NFB amp that uses feedforward to eliminate crossover distortion and lower harmonic distortion to unprecedented low levels. It also uses a regulated switching power supply and switches rails.
Which is to say, it does just about everything that high-end amplifier designers have been moving away from! Except for the feedforward, which kind of bypasses most of the issues.
I'll say this -- it's the cleanest, most neutral amplifier I've ever listened to. It doesn't seem to do as good a job with transients, e.g., piano notes as my humble A-21, though.
Whether the THX-patented AAA amp module is analogue or digital I'll not argue about. The Benchmark amp is generally described, maybe slightly inaccurately, as digital.
I have said all along that it has a lot of good points including quietness and probably "accuracy" (I have no means of measuring this, so take the word of Benchmark), but as someone has so aptly pointed out, there's some feature in this amp that "sucks the life out of music".
I'm not suggesting I know what that is, nor I'm really not interested, but that's precisely why I describe it as "boring". Far from technical I accept, but both descriptions are pretty good at putting into simple words it's unappealing sound. Peter
It's described very inaccurately as digital! It's plain ol' Class AB with a Class H rail. Its main difference with conventional amps is that it uses feedforward (distortion cancellation) in addition to feedback:
"The AHB2 is a linear amplifier that surpasses the sonic purity of all class-A amplifiers. No amplifier delivers lower noise or lower distortion. The small, passively cooled chassis, cleanly delivers 480 Watts bridged mono into 6 Ohms, with additional reserves for driving difficult speaker loads. Unlike power-hungry class-A amplifiers, the AHB2 achieves a power efficiency that rivals that of a Class D (switching) power amplifier."
https://benchmarkmedia.com/products/benchmark-ahb2-power-amplifier
In practice, it doesn't sound like the Class D amps I've heard.
Anyway, to me the question is does it really suck the life out of music? Because the absence of distortion doesn't do that for me. As someone said, live acoustical music has plenty of life into it, and no distortion whatsoever.
When I first got it, I level matched it and tried ABing it with my A-21. It seemed better in almost all respects. I've never heard such pure sound. And this was compared to a low distortion, high bias AB design that's mostly operating Class A.
So I guess the question Davey and others had (and I do too) was whether you were complaining about the absence of euphonic distortion or something else.
When I listened to piano through it, the transients and envelope of the AHB2 seemed off. The A-21 was far better (in all fairness, it's been reported to outdo even Pass in that one respect). It sounded like an actual piano, something most amps I've listened to don't do.
I asked John Siau about that at AES and he attributed the difference in sound to lower harmonic distortion, to which he says piano is very susceptible.
Anyway, the AHB was then out of my system for a while while I worked on other things and when I plugged it back in I got a rude shock because it seemed to be doing exactly what you said it did -- suck the life out of the music. What was missing were the transients. As with the piano, they seemed to be rounded off. That's why I was interested in what you wrote because you had apparently observed independently the same thing that I had.
I still have to do more listening, though. The Benchmark isn't supposed to require burn in but I hadn't used it for a while so I'd want to rule that out, and I'm using a more revealing DAC and did some major repairs on my speakers. Also the amps weren't level matched. So I want to do more long-term listening to make sure that I wasn't fooling myself.
I'm not really interested in the technology of amps, nor much their specs regarding matters beyond my low interest level! I just want the things to provide music that really excites - the nearest SENSATION to live music, whether there's a bit of distortion or not. SETs have high harmonic distortion, but they are the ones that make the sound so good.
I had my Benchmark for about 8 weeks although I was away for a couple of weeks. It was used quite a lot during that time and I listened to it exclusively before doing any comparison tests. I wrote my one and only equipment view here - http://db.audioasylum.com/mhtml/m.html?forum=amp&n=205426&highlight=benchmark+ahb&search_url=%2Fcgi%2Fsearch.mpl%3Fforum%3Dgeneral%26searchtext%3DEmotiva
I presume your A-21 is a Sugden. After I returned the Benchmark, I tried many power amps including Sugden FPA-4, Accuphase A-36, GamuT D200, Quad Platinum, NAD M32, Micromega M100.
I would have loved to find the Accuphase in particular provided the sound I wanted. It is Class A and so beautifully built, with very good controls and facilities. It was certainly a step up compared with the Class A Sugden, but not such that I'd keep it in favour of my old 845-based SET monoblocs.
The Quad was a big disappointment, but the Gamut was wonderful. For a while I was using this D200 fed by NAD M12 digital preamp and was very happy. When I home demo'd a NAD M50.2 CD player / CD ripper / hard drive music store / streamer I was offered the loan of a NAD M32 integrated amp. To my surprise this equals the much more costly M12 + D200 combo. Now this arguably a digital amp, although not so according to NAD's white paper attached - the M32 uses an updated version of the M2's processor. It's effectively a "DAC that can power speakers". Whatever its technology, it really is an excellent amp and FAR more enjoyable than the Benchmark. It's considerably better than the Quad and Sugden (and Red Wine) and marginally better than the Accuphase. It's advantage over the M12 + D200 combination is solely cost and reduction of cables.
I love it and the M50.2 that I bought recently. That's all I need. I now need no CD player as the M50.2 plays CDs, no PC to rip CDs, no NAS to store files, no radio and no streamer, as the M50.2 does all of these things. I have one digital AES/EBU cable and one pair of speakers - that's it! Peter
A-21 is a Parasound. Nice amp overall, high bias class A smoothness and free of most bipolar grain, but it has some flaws, namely flabby midbass (which actually sounds quite nice), less definition and soundstage precision than some of the very best, and highs that aren't the last word in cleanliness.
I confess I'm not personally fond of amps that add harmonic distortion. They sound syrupy or grainy to me, and I find both effects fatiguing (the latter far more than the former). What I love about the old tube stuff is that it was usually so free of unpleasant distortion. Yes, it rounded off the sound, but it lacked the harsh distortion one so often hears from solid state and for me that meant a much better listening experience.
So really, I prefer the absence of unpleasant distortion to the presence of pleasant distortion, and that for me accounts for a lot of the difference, not the presence of the euphonic coloration which is a drawback. I was listening to a 1950's mono recording of Duke Ellington mentioned in TAS the other day and it was wonderful. So much closer, despite the limitations of the technology, to what one actually hears at a live performance than the typical commercial release. Not I think because of the euphonic colorations, but because of the absence of non-euphonic ones!
For me, the Benchmark does that beautifully. For example, high notes like triangles are pure and bell like, while the same notes listened to through the A-21 sound more like a chuff of noise. And it does it without any syrupy coloration. It's the purest amp I've ever heard.
It's the dynamics that bother me, and I'm still not entirely sure about that -- as I said, I have to do more listening. But that for me is what robs the music of life.
Add in no to very little jump and mine would shut off on high dynamic passages ....
Really? Protection circuits? I haven't had that happen yet, thankfully.
I was operating them on a low-z load. never had it happen on 4 ohm maggies, they did on the 2/3 ohm Diva's.
Regards
Edits: 01/24/18
Heh, yes, I can see that happening. At AES, John Siau told me how delighted he is with how reliable the AHB has been in the field. It seems they've got a microprocessor in there monitoring everything from output current to what you ate for lunch. But I guess that rules out of seat-of-the-pants scenarios . . . good to know, since it means I can't drive my 2 ohm ribbon without the resistor in series . . . I have a feeling that when I triamp, the AHB2 is going to live on the ribbon, since its highs are so stunningly pure.
I think we're on the same wavelength on this. I possibly dwell less on the technology and just get on with listening to the sound I hear. To me (as you'll notice if you read my review), I was inclined to turn down the volume and maybe forward to the next track with the Benchmark, but to turn up the volume with the valve amps. To me that's a pretty useful pointer as to one's enjoyment of what one's hearing! At that time I had no other SS amps apart from the unsatisfying Red Wine.Since Sugden have been selling various versions of their well regarded A21 23 watt Class A amp, I rather assumed you were using Sugden. The Parasound is a much more powerful AB amp (first 7.5 walls Class A?) and I know nothing of it apart from what I see on their website.
My speakers are 102dB so I really only need a handful of watts, but I've found that more powerful high quality amps add significantly to the depth and control of bass. I noticed this most with the Gamut D200 - an old design with single MOSFET per channel. The NAD offers as good performance and I'd recommend you try to get a home demo of the M32.
Since your profile has no system details (I wish everyone would include these details) I don't know what speakers you use or what you feed your amp. The M32 has a DAC built in and has the option of a streamer card allowing access to NAS, PC, Tidal, Qobuz, radio, etc as well as being an integrated amp.
Edits: 01/21/18
You'll have to forgive me, as an old engineer, from being interested in the technical aspects. :-)
The Parasound is IIRC 10 watts of Class A. Which really covers most listening. A well-regarded John Curl design that many consider the beginning of high end amplification and a very popular amp because its economical. I know that I could happily listen to it forever, but it falls short of the very best and more expensive and often less practical (higher power Class A). I think if I could experiment with any amp now it would be a John Curl Class A design but I'm triamping so limited in what I can spend and how much heat and power usage I can tolerate! (Not to mention that my back isn't what it used to be . . . )
I've always been curious about the NAD amps. Would be fun to try. My problem is that there's no dealer here, so I usually hear things only at shows where everything sounds subpar or I have to buy them used or new and try them here, a slow and frustrating process. I bought the A-21 used and the AHB2 new. Most of the used amps I'm interested in checking out now seem to be in short supply, I've been watching the listings.
Apologies for the lack of a profile! My system has been in flux as I rebuilt it after a period with nothing and then a temporary system while we were renovating the house. I really should get around to it.
But basically, it consists of a pair of Tympani IVA's that I bought used and have been fixing up (delamination now repaired, I still have to do some work on the connector panels). I also have 16 Neo-8 planar drivers that I'm going to use to replace the Magnepan midrange, Satie here came up with that mod and by all accounts it's a dramatic upgrade to the old Maggies.
So anyway my plan is to tri-amp but I have to at least bi amp because as you can see in the photo my small listening room and the projection screen require me to move the two mid-tweeter panels in front of the four bass panels, so I have to delay them so everything will be in time:
To do the delay, I got a MiniDSP OpenDRC DA-8, which has SPDIF in and eight channels out. That will also let me experiment with FIR filters and phase and frequency compensation and room EQ. But I'm not sure I'm happy with the sound of the MiniDSP, I have to do more comparisons but in the brief ones I did it didn't equal my other converters.
For my source, I built an HTPC that's both silent and powerful -- fanless power supply and graphics card, SSD's, sound damping case, humongous and therefore quiet fan on the processor:
:-) I've been delighted with the results, you can't even tell it's on from more than a foot away and yet it uses a fast processor that will do any processing I want (I have a projector and my room does double duty for home theater so I couldn't go with a minimal configuration). Running JRiver for audio and video and Tidal's app for streaming. I have a Dragonfly Red that I've been using to experiment with MQA since I don't have a real MQA DAC.
Anyway, I needed a solid source of SPDIF for the MiniDSP and everything I read put the Lynx E22 at the top of the heap so I got one on Ebay. Since then, though, I've been experimenting with the analog outputs of the Lynx and they sound better than the Mini DSP. So if the MiniDSP doesn't prove out sonically, I think I'll have to get a multichannel converter. I was thinking either of the ExaSound e28, which has been replaced by the e38, or a pro rack like the Lynx Aurora 8 (which has also been replaced), but as usual have no way to compare.
In the meantime, I've been using the converter on the Lynx card for analog out to the power amp, and I'm finding that as its reputation suggests it's a very capable converter, if not quite the equal of what's available today.
Also have to do some work on acoustics, I have a couple of GIK QRD diffusers but need some absorption and deal with a cavity resonance (which will probably mean building a cabinet in the cavity).
So as you can see, a work in progress! But really sounding quite excellent even as is, with the Lynx feeding the A-21 and driving the Tympanis full range.
So basically I need a couple of small sweet amps for the mid-tweeter panels (the Neo 8's are more efficient than the woofer panels and of course the tweeter doesn't require a huge amount of power) and I can leave the larger A-21 doing bass duty.
Nice .....
Thanks.
Thanks for the background information.
My present attempts at system upgrade were prompted by my move from a London flat with an acoustically excellent 5-sided room with 10 ft ceilings to my present room of 975 sq ft and 7'7 ceilings. It's less the size than the shape and materials that present problems. It's parabolic in shape (pointed end of an egg-shaped building) with floor-to-ceiling glass on most of the curved wall. Not ideal! The speakers are either side of a central support column facing across the room.
The photo is rather cluttered with test amps and a pair of demo Quadral speakers
My initial thoughts were to look for a better amp and I've described my quest.
Now I'm also looking at possible alternative speakers. I posted something on the Planar section and was contacted by a Quad 2905 owner who lives a few miles away. We exchanged home visits and I was impressed enough to buy a used pair of Quads. They were doomed to be re-sold as these "barn doors" are aesthetically unacceptable in the middle of the room. Maggies would be even worse! So my likely choice is Martin Logan 13A, despite the ridiculous trans-Atlantic mark-up. They are £18.000 here - about $23,500 including taxes.
I'd really like to hear these too - http://blanko.nu/?lang=en - another see-through design but active with tube amps! I'll visit them when in Holland later this year.
Don't Crutchfield offer a free home trial on NAD? If they or someone else did, you may end up buying them - or looking for a used M32 as I did! Peter
Beautiful room! I an see that the acoustics would be a challenge, though.
I wouldn't be surprised if those Blankos sound better than the Logans, assuming of course that they did a good job with the design. The Logans look cool, but they suffer from the hybrid woofers with a high crossover.
Have you considered the Scaenas? I'm thinking that narrow line sources might work aesthetically.
As intriguing as it is, the M32 is more than I want to spend on an amplifier at this point. I may well have to spend $2k on a new DAC before this is done and have dental expenses next month so I was thinking of something in the $1500 range. If my budget were $3K, I'd probably try a Pass XA30.5 next. I've never heard anything less than love expressed towards those amplifiers and it isn't so big that heat, weight, and power consumption become an issue. I think I could get away with the Pass on the midrange because the Neodynium magnet BG line source is a good deal more efficient than the Maggie woofers, and because the Pass is really an AB amp with a super high bias (Class A to 30 watts, which would be 60 watts into 4 ohms, then about 160 watts Class B, and single-ended at low levels).
> A good module doesn't make a good amp.
Maybe not, but a good commercially produced module makes a possibility for a good amplifier at a much lower price than otherwise.
"It is quite possibly very accurate, has no colourisation and is dead quiet, but it's also dead boring!"
Exactly what an amplifier should be.
Dave.
An amp shouldn't render all recordings to sound "boring" like a dead hand was placed on the dynamics. This is a common high feedback amp design coloration that doesn't appear on static measurements because it is something going wrong with dynamic relationships and or time/phase relationships.
Brad,,
That kind of sound Has nothing to do with feedback , feedback is just one part of a very complex audio amp loop of variable structure ..
PSU
Amp bias
Output stage topology
Gain
Feedback
Driver stage
Beta droop
Z" load
Bias drift (SOA )
Open loop bandwidth and stability
Et al ,
On and on ,
Feedback amount , local or global is but another in the "loop" .... :)
Regards
Ok, but I have heard this problem, primarily, with amps that had a high amount of negative feedback. Whatever their other flaws, I have rarely heard that issue from no feedback amps.
Putzy amplfiers or class D in general , at least the ones i have heard sound far from dead , as a matter of fact with an unheard use of large amounts of negative feedback dead is not how i would describe class-D sound. IMO, they have issues with timbre , instrument size ,finesse and lack a proper soundscape for the illusion of realism.
Dead they are not , good class-D have good jump , better than a lot of class a/ab amplifiers but they bring other issues that may or maynot be offensive to those using them .
The big advantage of Class-D IMO, is the access to high affordable power , this usually eliminates clipping , making music sound more dynamic to those living with clipping for years via under powered Amplfiers ..
Regards
I don't agree about ncore sound. It has an unnatural sheen to the sound...a lot less like delta/sigma digital. True, it is not as dead sounding as high feedback Class AB but when a 30 watt tube amp can out dynamic it on normal (90db) speakers then I would not consider it terribly dynamic. Power is not to be a good indicator for this "Flattening" of the dynamic envelope.
Brad,
"Boring" is a totally subjective term used in this context.
You say a "dead hand placed on dynamics," but that's a meaningless conclusion/comment.
In my way of thinking, "boring" probably means an amplifier that is very close to the "straight wire with gain" that many used to talk about. An amplifier that adds (or subtracts) nothing from the sound, but simply provides the necessary voltage gain and current requirement.
Dave.
I'm not so sure in this case. I've been puzzled by the same phenomenon in my AHB2. It's the cleanest amp I've ever heard, precisely as one would expect given its vanishingly low distortion and in particular its feedforward compensation for crossover distortion. But I have the impression that the transient reproduction doesn't isn't right. I have no idea why from a technical perspective -- I can think of many possibilities, given the design -- but the transients seem rounded off, and that sucks the life out of the music. I don't think we're talking the absence of distortion here.
If transient production isn't right, and transients are rounded off, that's distortion Josh. :) (Whether it's measureable or not is another task.)
Stirring the pot with these guys, I was purposely talking with diffuse and not concise language. :) It's always some subjective aspect of the performance they hang their hat on. I have no problem with that, but you can't have it both ways.
Dave.
You have a point. :-)
For what it's worth, and speaking personally rather than technically, I prefer "straight wire with gain" accuracy. I find that euphonic coloration becomes cloying and annoying after a while and I don't think that distortion adds something to recordings of acoustical instruments, which in real life have a gusto and purity that makes our efforts sound pathetic, and so no lack of impact!
Speaking technically, I'm really curious about this issue of dynamic distortion. Clearly we're missing something because this doesn't seem to show up on steady state measurements of the harmonic spectrum or IMD, which I find normally correlate pretty well with the way a good amplifier sounds in its linear range for reasons that anyone who has ever played with additive synthesis and noted the effect of harmonic spectrum on timbre will understand. And it doesn't seem to show up on conventional dynamic measurements, either, we've known how to deal with TIM for years. The main candidates I can think of are feedback loop issues, power supply impedance/sagging, and the way the amplifier/feedback loop responds to back EMF, which could explain some of the long time constant stuff I hear on piano ADSR. But the AHB2 is a complicated beast, what with its feedforward amp (if I understand correctly) and rail switching, so I can see other possibilities -- assuming I'm not imagining things!
I think most hear understand 1) what boring means and 2) understand when all recordings are exhibiting this trait then the signal transmission cannot be as pure as the measurements claim...unless you think accurate reproduction of recordings should sound boring. Doesn't show much faith in those making the recordings...
Well, I disagree on both points.
I think "boring" might have a different meaning to many listeners....and certainly depending upon the context.
AND when all recordings are exhibiting a particular trait, that's NOT boring....Something is wrong.
This is a perfect example of how the "language" of audio subjective evaluation has become so vague and meaningless.
If we're going to hang our hat on this type of language, we have to live with the pesky questions that come with it.
Example, and one you might appreciate: A guy returned one of my Apogee active crossovers many years ago and told me it didn't have any "jump." I told him on the phone it's not supposed to have "jump." Silence on the other end.
I sent that same crossover on to another fella with Diva's and he replied "it's very dynamic, I haven't heard my Diva's exhibit that amount of dynamics, ever."
It's very tricky to make conclusions based on insufficient information.
Dave.
I think I was the first person to use the word "boring" on this thread to describe one particular amp.
The amp in question is the Benchmark AHB-2. Yes it's boring to listen to, but yes, it's probably very accurate if its output is analysed on the test bench.
I described this amp's sound as such that one tends to want to turn down the volume and maybe to forward on to the next track. An exciting amp will have the reverse - the temptation is to turn up the volume.
Most valve amps have considerable distortion, but often sound better than SS amps with many speakers. They add excitement to the music and I don't care if it has poor results on the test bench - all I want from an amp is to enjoy my music with as near as possible as the enjoyment at a live venue. Would you not agree?
I certainly understand you premise that a power amplifier should add distortion, or whatever, to add excitement to the music. That's not a new premise. It's decades old.
I have a few friends who've listened to the Benchmark amp extensively (I had a limited exposure) and they don't describe it as "boring." I also have read the reviews on the amp in Stereophile, etc. None of these have mentioned a "boring" presentation either. So, it's my opinion that your boring subjective evaluation is flawed.
That said, no, I don't agree that an amplifier should attempt to create the enjoyment of a live venue. That's not its job. I'm not sure why that's such a difficult concept to grasp.
Dave.
> I have a few friends who've listened to the Benchmark amp extensively (I had a limited exposure) and they don't describe it as "boring." I also have read the reviews on the amp in Stereophile, etc. None of these have mentioned a "boring" presentation either.
Firstly, I think you should re-read my definintion of "boring" in my description of the Benchmark. I defined it as the urge to turn down the volume control (you don't want elevator music playing loudly) as opposed to exciting amps where the urge is to turn it up.
That said, please also re-read part of Stereophiles's review, in particular the paragraphs under "Listening in the Country". Expressions such as these crop up:
"the sound was somewhat hard and thin"
"robbed of some of its warmth and resonance"
"sounded strange. Both voices were higher, not in pitch but in tonal range, as if they'd been transformed from mezzo-sopranos"
"her voice was robbed of its bell-like richness by the AHB2"
These are an indication that this amp is very speaker dependent regarding performance, although (as I previously mentioned) their review is GENERALLY very favourable.
The Absolute Sound reviews says:
"I'm not sure I can in good conscience recommend this amplifier to them [audiophiles] as I am not sure they are in search of what it offers: a precision instrument designed to perform the precisely defined task of reproducing music and sound accurately"
HiFi Plus concludes:
"It seems fussier about speaker partnering than usual, however, and I would recommend trying it with your speakers before purchase"
Remember, when I bought my Benchmark there were no worthwhile reviews for me to read. I was influenced by an Avantgarde owner who thought it was the best amp in the world. After the very disappointing sound it offered through my AG speakers, I found a couple of reviews had been recently published. Of course I was looking for hints in these reviews that all was not as rosy as a quick read would suggest. Reviewers are never outright critical of the products they review, so I find that "reading between the lines" of a good review is most important in deciding whether a product should be bought.
Many people will be delighted with their Benchmarks as part of their system, but I found that most of the 8 or 10 other amps I've tried since were far better in my system than the Benchmark -
Hope this explains why I found the Benchmark "boring" and was pleased to get rid of it. I now have 5 alternative amps that are considerably preferable to listen to than the Benchmark. These by NAD, Accuphase, Gamut, Consonance (tube) and Micromega. Incidentally Red Wine and Quad together with the Benchmark were the most unsatisfactory.
of the whole Halcro 'lowest distortion amps ever' of maybe 15 years ago. Everybody loved them at the time, heard comments about their attack and possibly thinness (didn't pay a whole lot of attention because waaay beyond my price range) and, in just a few years, they were gone.
For the best amps ever, they sure disappeared quickly. Too much heroic effect to remove distortion, just like the Benchmark? I certainly don't know...
Ha-ha. Yes, but there is a place for very accurate amplifiers - and for that matter speakers. Recording studios need them. I have had both the Benchmark amp and ACT 50 Active speakers, both designed primarily for studio use, and was hugely disappointed by both. They are best left in recording studios where the engineers need them as an accurate tool in the work, rather than for audiophiles who want their music to offer excitement and enjoyment, even at the cost of a little inaccuracy.
Good clarification...not that anyone other than Davey seemed to need it. The only thing that puzzles me is why you are still trying SS amps with AG speakers? I have heard AGs owns SS Integrated with several models and the sound is always hard and too forward. The best AG demo I heard was with Audiopax electronic, a Lampizator GG DAC and Sound Galleries music server.
For many years I used tube amps with the Avantgardes. These were all power amps fed by the output from a Mark Levinson 390S - a CD player with variable (analogue) output and 2 digital inputs, one used for DAB tuner.
These amps included Art Audio PX-25, Art Audio Carissa (845 based), Graaf GM-20 (6C33C based), Audio Note 300B and Consonance Cyber 845 monos. Of these, my favourites were the AA ones and the Cyber 845. The Graaf (OTL design) was physically noisy (it buzzed constantly) and the AN was dreary.
A year or so ago I decided to look for a suitable SS design for a number of reasons - I'd spend more time listening to it, AG themselves build only SS amps, etc.
I certainly don't regret switching to SS and have no plans for returning to tubes, although I still have the Cyber 845s.
I've tried several amps with the best being NAD M12 with Gamut D200 and NAD M32 integrated.
I know where you are coming from with the tube vs SS , SET requires good design and the right speakers load to deliver , in other words "effort " where SS is much easier and plug and play for the most part with very little effort and little to no maintenance ..
Regards
> I know where you are coming from with the tube vs SS , SET requires good design and the right speakers load to deliver , in other words "effort " where SS is much easier and plug and play for the most part with very little effort and little to no maintenance ..
No, that's not really the situation, at least as far as my system is concerned.
My speakers are unfussy in as much as all amps can be used without horrors. When I bought the Avantgardes, many people said that horns and SETs were the made-in-heaven combination, so I acquired a good SET. My circumstances at the time allowed me to try other SETs for prolonged periods of time and I loved them all - except the buzzing Graaf and the dreary AN.
It was only after 10+ years that I thought that there surely must be a SS amp that sounded at least as good as the SETs. After all there are thousands to choose from compared with the "cottage industry" of SET builders - good as they are.
You will see from my other posts that my search for an equally exciting SS amp took quite a while and included some serious disappointments. However I feel I've achieved what I set out to do - find a SS amp that allows my horns to sing as beautifully as the SETs.
Peter
Mike over on the Shark runs his AG with toobs, i did hear them with the Toobs but he has also run them with SS and liked the extra grunt and control. With very low distortion amps the Pre-amp dictates sonics immensely, that's not to say it's not so otherwise, but very much so with very low distortion amplifiers.
Not unusual to see many SS amps being driven by tooby pre-amps ....
Regards
Edits: 01/04/18
So, you don't accept that an amplifier can have distortions that would result in a boring sound? I have heard just this effect with a number of amplifiers even including some rather expensive ones like the McIntosh MC501 monos. Your claim they are just being neutral doesn't hold water with real music experience, where live almost never sounds boring. Your premise that the other amps that sound more "alive" are sounding this way due to distortion makes little sense as distortion will invariably degrade a performance not enhance it. Also, your premise implies that nearly all recordings are somehow badly missing the core dynamics of the performance and we should just accept far from an alive sound because that is what was actually recorded. My own experience with recording live performances and possession of "direct to disk" recordings shows your implication to be wrong. Many recordings are far better than the gear allows you to hear them.
If there is a dullness or as we have been saying boring sound with all recordings then how can this be right compared to an amp that shows a wide contrast in dynamics and liveliness from recording to recording?? Maximum contrast between recordings is more likely to be correct rather than a uniform "neutral" sound...this is just another form of distortion. Of course you have to believe the original premise from th OP that the benchmark amp renders the sound boring...I know I got that feeling with the benchmark DAC.
One would have thought this an easy Process to understand , I guess not .... :)
Edits: 01/03/18
It is an easy process to understand. Do you need some help with the basic concept??I believe that a power amplifier should be (as close as possible to) a straight wire with gain. How difficult is that to grasp?
I assume you disagree. That's totally fine.
My goodness.
Dave.
Edits: 01/03/18
Well you seem to know so much you are even making up my responses .. :)
The "perfect" amplifier is a straight wire with gain, Big foot is considered pretty fast and gainly ,
which have you seen ... :???
Regards
Edits: 01/04/18
I'm not sure why you're still adding your two cents in this portion of the thread.
Brad is a fella that outlines his thinking rather well. I may agree or disagree with it, but it certainly warrants reading his posts carefully. In other words, I know where he's coming from.
You, OTOH seem incapable of anything but pedantic and juvenile replies.
If you don't mind, please don't respond to any further posts I make in this thread. Thanks much.
Dave.
Excuse me for trying to communicate at your level ... :)
I had lost you way back when you couldn't grasp how loudspeaker imp/ phase affects the sound of amplfiers, why Brad wastes his time with your circular nonsense is beyond me, being a research scientist , i guess he loves the chase ...
Regards
Well, I'm not sure what the juvenile insults are all about, but you've illustrated my point perfectly.
I really don't have a clue who you are, or if you have any expertise in the audio field since you don't have the courtesy to identify yourself or even sign your postings.
And (not unexpectedly) you don't accept offline communication.
I asked you nicely previously, but I'll try again with an expanded request and ask you to no longer respond to any of my posts, anywhere.
I hope you can heed that request.
Dave.
My premise was very simply and clear.
Your post is total speculation on various other "premises" that I didn't state.
Dave.
You stated distortion is improving apparent dynamics to make the sound less boring...now THAT is really some speculation with not a shred of proof.
No I didn't. Read my previous post again.
I said I understood the premise that some folks think a power amplifier should perform that function.
You need to actually read my posts more carefully and not read between the lines. I know that's difficult for you. You had issues with that on the old Apogee forum too.
I've stated one, and only one, premise in this series of posts. If you choose to read it, then you can agree or disagree with it, that's your prerogative.
Dave.
No one has to read between the lines with your claims of "straight wire with gain" and if it doesn't sound interesting then it must be that the other amps are adding "excitement" distortion. Hogwash.
You have your credo plastered all over this thread. You are ignoring completely the listening aspect of the whole thing for essentially a view of "if it measures great and sounds boring then there is something wrong with the listener who can't handle the truth".
How is it possible for you to understand someone who thinks a power amplifier should add excitement? I don't understand this even though I think reproduced music should often not sound boring (there are of course some boring recordings...often with way too much compression). Audible distortion, either tonally or temporally, is to be avoided. The key word there is audible. If an amp sounds boring with most of a persons record collection there is likely something wrong temporally that is caused by some aspect of that product's design. Why is that premise so hard for you to accept? Because you worship the static measurements? Read some research into the validity of those measurements by Cheever, Geddes and way back Crowhurst.
You seem to fail to realize that the listener is supreme not the oscilloscope and that low measured distortion does not guarantee good sound or "true" replication of the original signal. There have been several studies showing this can easily be the case. Geddes even found a slightly negative correlation between THD and listener preference. HOW you get rid of distortion matters just as much (or more) than the distortion itself. Your understanding of these things is very superficial.
I think it was Richard Heyser who said " "Perhaps more than any other discipline, audio engineering involves not only purely objective characterization but also subjective interpretations. It is the listening experience, that personal and most private sensation, which is the intended result of our labors in audio engineering. No technical measurement, however glorified with mathematics, can escape that fact."
The "straight wire with gain" is an abstract concept. I didn't make it up, but it is (or has been) an objective for some amplifier designers to try and achieve. Certainly there are intangibles, engineering hurdles, etc, etc, that crop up along the process in producing a final (real) product. Whether those intangibles (distortions) produce a more realistic (live, boring, whatever you want to call it) audible result is open for discussion. Nevertheless, the original objective remains.....at least for some designers.
If you think the "straight wire with gain", or my belief that it is the correct objective for power amplifier design is "hogwash", then so be it.
I'm not sure why that amplifier design premise should be so difficult for you to grasp.
It's not just mine.....it's been the design premise of numerous audio amplifier designers through the decades.
Dave.
I am at a loss as to why you think I don't grasp such a basic concept and it is widely known that you didn't come up with it. Whether it is a worthy goal or not in the abstract is not much in debate...all amps should strive for the max linearity...according to the listeners. This is not as subjective as you think as there have reasonable attempts to correlate listener preference with distortion. It turns out to not be what most meter readers expect. The reason being the typical strategy for lowering distortion seems to introduce other issues, the most obvious being reduction of low order harmonics at the expense of making many more, sonically damaging high order harmonics. In other words the PATH to lower distortion is arguably more important than magnitude of the reduction. The impact is highly non-linear.
Linearity according to the scope is not weighted for the impact of those residual distortions on the listeners. Cheever and Geddes both came up with exponential weighting with increasing harmonic order. Once accounted for there is a big change in ranking for sonic "straight wire".
"all amps should strive for the max linearity...according to the listeners."
That's an interesting statement. I hope you're not speaking for most listeners. :)
I believe many listeners don't give a hoot about linearity, or distortion performance, or any other objective evaluation characteristic of power amplifiers.
I think you are, at least somewhat, in that camp as well, yes?
Your treatise on why nearly all audio amplifiers are incorrectly designed establishes your baseline on this topic. Unless you've pulled back on your premise regarding this???
Dave.
They may not care on a technical level but many of them care about it sounding more realistic. Correlating what they find more realistic with measurements IS interesting or at least should be to every audio designer... not just a demonstration of design complexity chops.
I walk the walk, having only SET at home. Linearity within the SET domain though is of interest to me, which is why I go with amps from Aries Cerat. Ultra stable and quiet power supplies and using the most linear tubes and design techniques.
Yes, unfortunately walking the walk to Aries Cerat land is extremely expensive.
Very interesting power amplifier products nonetheless, but not an example of what the audio industry should be producing nowadays. IMHO.
Dave.
Your last sentence is rather odd. Why would AC gear not be what the audio industry should be producing? Because of what? Heat? Weight? Price? The "industry" should produce the best sounding gear possible, IMO. AC represents one company's vision of what it takes to do that.
Cost, of course.
Dave.
Just the last one .... ? :)
You should request a list of acceptable amplifier designs and forward it to AC... BTW you need to give the name of at least one giant killer Class D , best of the best ...
Regards
Edits: 01/05/18 01/05/18
Actually if you look at the Milliwat to 1 watt distortion on tooby amps distortion is very low , this is the RMS sweet spot when listening domestically on 90db/w/m speakers ..,
Regards
Davey,We are obviously discussing in absolute terms and i know you know this , so why the silly retorts.
All Situations are, but not limited to , impedance mismatch , power cables , IC, pre-amp drive, setup experience rah ,rah ,rah , has to be taken into account and dealt with before commenting, many obvious reasons why novice type mistakes can account for varying results as you experienced with your active xover sale ..
Your Thesis ,One thought it dead no jump , you , it's not suppose to have Jump. Another thought it dynamic, well , adding the ying and yang content its not suppose to sound dynamic, right ..?
:)
Edits: 01/02/18
I thought I was talking to Brad here. I guess not.
Dave.
Such an amp will not sound Boring , as it will render recordings without interference , dead low DR recordings will sound as such , lively high DR recordings will sound as such .
When all recordings have the same presentation is when this becomes an issue ..
Some years ago, An amp designer I'm friendly with had an amplfier like that , not boring , the opposite, lots of jump on all recordings , adding its own flavor, this added feature was obvious when we played our own studio recordings where one in particular had an added 50hz boom put in for massive kick drum effect , his amp squashed it , tighten the bass with so much grip the boom disappeared into the back ground and was not pronnouced at all, so what most were praising as controlled , accurate tight bass was not ..
This kind of coloration and to be more precise "distortion" is not obvious on the bench as the amp measured exemplary ...
Regards
So a straight wire with gain is NOT "boring." I got it. Whew!
But hold on now.......you said "Boring." What's the difference between "boring" and "Boring"??Seems like you've made a conclusion on your friends amp with little facts to support it. If the amp measured exemplary on the bench, then clearly the measurements were not sufficient and/or your subjective evaluation had some other explanation.
The immediate knee-jerking to a position that bench testing is inherently insufficient to identify subjective performance is just the easy way out and indicates a lack of intellectual curiosity. I submit that a more rigorous testing scheme probably would have identified the "issue" you noted. Or at least given you some further insight.Dave.
Edits: 01/02/18
Seems you misunderstood what i wrote , please read again , i gave enuff factors to support my position , so much so the issue was addressed by the designer ..
Regards
Edits: 01/02/18
A romper room Prose ,,,,, how the mighty has fallen ,...
Regards
> "It is quite possibly very accurate, has no colourisation and is dead quiet, but it's also dead boring!"
> Exactly what an amplifier should be.
If I have to choose between an accurate, uncoloured but dead boring amp and one that offers excitement to my listening (with a little inaccuracy if fed into an oscilloscope), I know which I'd choose!
In my view an amplifier should try to offer a similar excitement factor to a live performance - I care much less what the computer analysis says.
Peter
Hi, Peter,
I agree that some coloration can be a good thing if it makes the music come alive and sound more realistic and natural in astereo"high fidelity" system. But this can be done with a preamp as well as a power amp. Or both, depending on components. In my case I use a sweet sounding preamp with a "boring" amp to get the sound I'm after with my system.
Regards,
Tom
Hi TomI don't think accurate amplifiers need to be boring. It's just that some are - in the same way some studio monitor speakers (designed to be accurate) sound horrid in the home.
I see you have a NAD M22. I'm not sure that would be boring. In fact, the reason I bought my (boring) Benchmark amp was because a fellow Avantgarde owner was waxing lyrical about his new Benchmark that he considered marginally better than his M22. In the event, I established that his No 1 priority was to have dead silence from his 107dB speakers and the Benchmark is probably the quietest amp on the market. I was SO disappointed with it, but after trying many other amps with or without my M12 preamp, I choose a NAD M32 integrated steamer/preamp/DAC/power amp. I'd not describe it as in the least boring, but I believe it to be pretty accurate. I'm well pleased with it, but now have a selection of very nice tried and tested amps for sale as the M32 beats or matches them all. These include Accuphase A-36, Gamut D200 Mk III, Red Wine Signature 30-2, Consonance Cyber 845 and NAD M12 preamp.
Peter
Edits: 01/01/18
I auditioned the M12/M22 pairing and while it was very dynamic, it seemed a bit analytical, lacking the bloom and reverberation that I enjoy. I much preferred the M22 with a tube preamp; it has the dynamics and power that make music come alive, with the harmonics and body that keep it sounding natural. The M12 might have sounded good with a tube amp but I'm not interested in using power tubes so didn't bother listening to that match up. It would be interesting though, to hear the differences between the M12/M22 pairing and the M32 integrated.
Tom
> It would be interesting though, to hear the differences between the M12/M22 pairing and the M32 integrated.
That's a comparison I'd be interested in too. However I wouldn't be interested in changing from the M32 which for me has plenty of the excitement factor we all want from our music. Whether it can be described as more "tube-like" than the M12/M22 I don't know but I prefer its sound to the M12 with 845-based mono power amps.
Peter
When is it coloration and how are we determining no coloration , Measurements or when it sounds boring .. ?
Any amp that renders recordings boring has distortion but not necessarily in tonality. There are also temporal distortions and those could be more serious to negatively impacting the realism of reproduction.
Any amp that renders recordings boring has distortion but not necessarily in tonality. There are also temporal distortions and those could be more serious to negatively impacting the realism of reproduction.
You Alive ..!! :)When are you going to fill us in on your new wares, heard Wisnon heard your setup ........
Regards
Edits: 01/02/18
He only heard my small system...not the big one. I am waiting for my Aries Cerat Genus Integrated amp to go with the Kassandra Dac.
Weren't you using them at the Show ? heard speakers there sounded good ...
Edits: 01/02/18
Which show?
Swiss
Ah yes. I was reading your post wrong thinking you heard the setup at the show that is why i was wondering where. We managed a very good show sound. Like cooking it is hard to screw up when you use the best ingredients.
Hi, A.Wayne,
I'm not really sure what "boring" sounds like. I was responding to cawson@onetel's comment that an accurate amp was "boring". Otherwise, I consider transparency to be what's important if I'm trying to let the signature of a component, the coloration I like, to pass through to the speakers.
In the case of my preamp, it's signature is measured as having plenty of second harmonic distortion which is described as "fattening" up the sound. To my ears that euphonic distortion provides a richness of tone and sweetens the sound without creating a lush, syrupy mess. And why it's important that the power amp I use with that preamp doesn't add much of it's own coloration; it needs to be transparent. The result is that I hear wonderfully pleasing and realistic music played from four different sources.
I don't believe it's possible to have an absolutely perfect sound system without spending a whole lot of money on components and an acoustically engineered listening room. I also don't think it's possible to know exactly what the recording, mastering, and/or mixing engineer(s) heard so whether a stereo component is "accurate" is somewhat moot. In my opinion.
Regards,
Tom
That's (more or less) the standard answer that folks have posting for years. I get it. It's so cliche' at this point, that it's boring.
My post was to highlight how the "baseline" for audio equipment performance has skewed through the years. "High Fidelity" didn't used to be a subjective label and marketing term.
Dave.
If it sounds dead it is and really not accurate at all and this will show when on the test bench doing Measurements ..
Regards
You didn't read his post.
He used the the words "dead quiet" and "dead boring" but also the words "very accurate" and "no colourisation."
So, your post doesn't make any sense...in this context.
Dave.
Because of the way he wrote it, I think. It's a remarkably pure sounding amplifier. It's transients that seem to have issues. I don't think enough work has been done in this area. John Curl as I recall pointed to an interesting paper on FM distortion in feedback loops, but even he doesn't know what the story is here. The issue just hasn't been fully analyzed from an engineering perspective. But I hear it again and again when I AB level-matched amps.
Responding to your conclusion , about being "boring " , not his ....
> "High Fidelity" didn't used to be a subjective label and marketing term.
Interestingly (or not) the expression High Fidelity is used in UK in the way Stereo is used in US. I prefer the UK expression as it purports to describe the quality of sound rather than a technical expression for 2 channel music!
I'm quite pleased that my description of what I want from my Hi-Fi (stereo) is recognised as "standard". Maybe I'm less odd than I thought!
HNY
To be clear, I was referring to the term "high fidelity" in a much broader context......not just audio.
Usage in that larger context (excluding audio) it would have a literal meaning and not the squishy meaning it does in the audio industry.
We're putting quote marks around the word "standard" now? Classic. :)
Dave.
> We're putting quote marks around the word "standard" now? Classic. :)
Haha - Did you not notice that I was quoting you? Quotes deserve quote marks. ;-)
I do keep trying myself and have not found one to my liking as yet ......
perfect opportunity for me to chime in.
I use N core, very happy, best sound I've heard.
FYI, the M22 is an Ncore-based amplifier.https://www.stereophile.com/content/nad-masters-series-m22-power-amplifier
Dave.
Edits: 12/30/17
On delving into the NAD site, it seems that Stereophile is correct. The M22 uses Ncore, but the M2 and M32 use Direct Digital, now owned by Cambridge Silicon Radio. Tt's presumably because the M22 is nothing more than a power amp, whereas the M2 and M32 are a lot more - preamp DACs with gain, etc. The NAD white paper gives valid reasons for choosing the DDFA for their M2 and M32.
Edits: 12/30/17 12/30/17
NAD uses two distinct class D sets, Hypex based, in M22 (nCore) and D3020 (lower Hypex amp), and the other one from CSR.
Contrary to some people's beliefs, the "D" in "class D" does not refer to or imply 'digital'
There are digital class D amplifiers, and there are analog class D amplifiers. The central issue is the representation of the signal and feedback in the primary control loop.
For analog amplifiers, digital inputs need conversion to analog before amplification. For digital amplifiers, analog inputs need conversion to digital before amplification. The amplifier performs the conversion to analog, it is a "power DAC".
It would be erroneous to assume either is intrinsically better on all merits.
Hypex amplifiers are analog class D. The Zetex/CSR are digital class D. NAD uses both types depending on the product.
I find my M22 excellent, essentially perfect, for my main speakers, and my D3020 very good within its power limitation.
Hi, cawson,
Your comment made me chuckle. Things have changed so much lately that the lowly power amp has become the Rodney Dangerfield of audio land. :-)
Regards,
Tom
I believe CSR is now part of Qualcomm. I have been looking into what differences there are between the c390dd and m32 and it looks like about the only thing is the move from Zetex to CSR other than a couple of features. Are you aware of anything else, even as it relates to how these compare with the m2?
I am hoping the m32 offers an improvement over the c390dd as I just bought one to be delivered soon.
Zetex was bought by CSR so probably no difference there. I was unaware that CSR is now part of Qualcomm.The M32 has a very similar spec but it does have a great touch screen and it has a bit more power. The M32 has 4 MDC slots (2 large and 2 small) with 2 free slots for BluOS card, etc. The 390DD has 3 MDC slots (1 large and 2 small) but they all seem to be used if the photo on NAD's site is correct - which means you have to forgo the analogue inputs if you want to add the BluOS card - they are both large size. The M32 has a headphone socket.
I assume there's a step up in quality in areas such as casework and probably power supply to justify the higher price and perhaps explains the extra 2Kg in weight.
I'm very pleased indeed with the M32 and I'm sure you will be too. I have the BluOS card fitted so I can access my music stored on a NAS and internet radio of course - and streaming services such as Tidal and Qubuz. The M32 supports MQA - not sure about the 390DD. I'm looking to get an M50.2 soon in which case I won't need the BluOS card in the M32.
Edits: 12/30/17
Thanks. I was not aware zetex was acquired by CSR. So I wonder what has changed under the hood on these units since the m2? Hard to believe it's nothing.
My c390dd is fully loaded with the analog card and newer smaller BluOS card. The phono stage in the analog card is not great but the adc is transparent so I use an outboad and am hoping/expecting the m32 phono stage is improved. Have you used it?
The c390dd does support mqa via bluos. I am going to yank the card out of it and put it in the m32. The c390 even offers rudimentary, yet effective room eq in the form of a 5 band eq covering the lower frequencies that works with a spl meter. I am hoping this omission in the m32 is due to Dirac live implementation on the roadmap.
Anyway, I am assuming the m32 improved the power supply as you suggest and that they use better parts. The m32 is a stunner aesthetically.
What are you expecting to get out of the m50.2? I have read that it's bluos implementation is more sophisticated, but haven't dug into the details.
I have the Mk I BluOS card that fits the large slots. From what you say, the Mk II is slimmer for the smaller slots.
I've not used any of the analogue inputs on the M32, nor on the M12 that I'll be selling soon, as I have no analogue devices.
Apart from hopefully even better streaming and radio, I'm expecting the M50.2 to play my stored music from its built-in HDs far better than via a remote NAS. My RipNAS is nearly full and its ripper needs replacing, hence my impatience to get an M50.2. Also as I recently sold my Mark Levinson 390S CDP, the M50.2 will offer both CD ripping and playback without ripping - a very rare feature for some reason.
I took delivery of an M32 Wednesday. I am acutely aware of psychological bias, and I think it is the most understated element of our hobby, and it is early in my ownership- but I have to say that the m32 seems to be so far beyond the c390dd that it defies logic. The best amplifier I have ever owned is a Devialet 120, and the m32 is definitely in this territory- if not even better. I have a ton of travel coming up, but will do a write up after I get a few hundred hours on it. Also, FYI- here is a link that indicates some promise that DIRAC Live may be added to the m12/m32. http://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receivers-amps-processors/1530195-nad-m17-m27-43.html#post55411882
Recognizing your post is a year old, I'm curious if you kept the M32 and how you'd characterize the contrast to C390DD (which I own and am considering upgrading to M32). Thanks
Les - Excellent that you are immediately impressed by the M32. I bought mine 10 months old, so I can't suggest how much or little improvement you will notice after burning in.I presume you have installed the BluOS card from the C390 into the M32. I look forward to your update when you return from your travels.
I've read a little about DIRAC but I must admit I don't know how it works. Is it an extra box in the signal path, or is it 100% software that is used by M32 to adjust for room / speaker deficiencies? I'm thinking of getting Martin Logan 13A speakers which have their own ARC system for sub-500 Hz equalisation. Peter
Edits: 01/06/18
Ahh, I see. In your case the m50.2 makes sense. I use a NAS, but just end up streaming Spotify, Tidal or Radio Paradise 99% of the time so it is not on the front of my mind.
The newer bluos card is smaller, but offers no other advantage.
I have become a big fan of NAD over the last few years. I used to raise my nose at the brand and consider it as mid fi, but with tech like this a company of Lenbrooks scale can simply do things that small boutique companies cannot. They have also shifted their focus, and gone upmarket and the new masters stuff is undoubtedly the real deal.
Have you found a good community of m32 users anywhere?
I use an SMSL SA-60 in one of my systems to drive Paradigm Titans (v4). It sounds very good but must be set up properly to work best. The 24v power supply it came with was defective. I replaced it with an Indeed 12v 5a supply which works much better. It needs to be fronted with a preamp to sound best, preferably with tubes. It sounds much better than a Sonic Impact amp-better clarity, bigger more detailed soundstage and much deeper bass. It is not a subwoofer amp and must be used with efficient speakers.
The SA-60 is a tpa-3116 chip amp. If you Google tpa-3116 you should find a lot of information. There is a huge thread about these amps on Audiokarma.org.
Edits: 12/29/17
This does look like an exciting area to explore. If I had the time, money and was younger (meaning I already spent 40 years tweaking my own system) I would enjoy building a good powered speaker system.
Are you looking to DIY an amp or a ready built? If you're DIYing one then cross post over at the DIY/Tweak forum. Great bunch of guys over there and they dabble in that kid of stuff.
I think the Class D is more a fringe kind of audio. Kind of like SET's, high efficiency, arrays, etc... you need to build an entire system around it.
yes, class D can be cold and sterile when paired with clinical gear, but nothing woke my way too forgiving, but otherwise awesome sounding & imaging NHT superzeros like my panasonic SA-XR, but it didn't sound as liquid with energy RC10s which have awesome low level resolution and tweeter speed, of the totally unforgivable coice of port resonance, or cereal box cabinet resonance when the ports are plugged. $500+ list minis should NEVER have flimsy 1/2" - 5/8" cabinets!
the other reason i'm looking for class D, besides cost, is i'm considering a tubes/autoformer/N core final system and want to see how class D sounds on hyperdetailed RAAL ribbons
"want to see how class D sounds on hyperdetailed RAAL ribbons"
with high quality class D, the difference in sound is more in the input analog electronics. In any case, I use NAD M22 on Magnepan 3.6 which certainly have 'detailed' 5 foot ribbon tweeters.
Watch the impedance, i did notice serious timbre issues when driving class-D into low Z loads...
Regards
Hi, airtime,
Class D amps are no longer a fringe element; the technology has matured to where quality PWM amp modules are now incorporated into mainstream product lines for many highly regarded manufacturers. Not everyone agrees that they've reached the highest pinnacles of audiophilia but more and more audiophiles are buying them and enjoying the benefits of Class D amplification. They aren't just used as inexpensive subwoofer plate amps anymore.
I own a Class D amp and it was added as part of an existing stereo system; I didn't sell everything off to accommodate the amp.
As for "giant killers", I don't believe they exist, unless the giant was getting on in age and was already on the way out. :-)
Regards,
Tom
with mixed results, IMNSHO.
What they gain by bi-amping and designing the x-over into the individual amps for each driver, they loose because Class D Pulse Width Modulation doesn't really sound that good.
Again, JMHO and nothing more.
apparently you still haven't heard of N cores yet...
many consider n core modules to be THE ABSOLUTE MOST NEUTRAL AMPLIFIERS IN EXISTENCE
now, if you have to have a romantic (thick, euphonic distorted, veiled) sound, as it seems like a MAJORITY do, then no... you'll NEVER like class D
me? i HATE overly romantic sound. i wanted to take an axe to my NAD until i replaced it with an onkyo which got replaced by the panasonic SA-XR that finally breathed some much need air & life into my NHT soft domes.
some of us like class D ON PURPOSE
Been a while since I've been here and I don't post much, but, I have a pair of Ncore NC400 Monos and they are the best sounding amps I have had in my system. For the sake of sharing, there are user reviews and listening impressions just starting to come in on a brand new Icepower class D amp at the link below. At least one user has made favorable comparisons to his NC400's. I am close to pulling the trigger on one. Considerably less $$ than Ncore too.
Harold
I would not mind re-visiting the Primare I32 in comparison to the older I22
integrated amp?
then Why have not other makers some with Deep pockets not immediately switched over?
Love here. Just right for my woofers
Hi, Ivan303,So you've heard these "big boy" powered speakers? What specifically is it about the PWM amps that don't sound good?
I know where the weakness is with my power amp, but unless you're talking upper echelon equipment they all have something that could be better. User preferences and system synergy (and realistically, budget) determine our choices. It's a compromise in any case and Class D amps can sound pretty good if integrated properly into a stereo system. Just my humble opinion. :-)
Regards,
Tom
Edits: 12/30/17
I think we are somewhere in the learning curve of how to best use this class of audio. I know over in the UK they've been using powered speakers since the 90's, so it would be best to ask the guys over there.
When I say a system jas to be built around it that is not a knock. In audio matching is everything. Like you can't be using a 83db speaker with a 3 watt SET amp.
Me personally, I don't understand class D and trying to reinvent the wheel??? I would lean towards the powered speaker direction with Class D.
For me, it's the PWM amp's amazing power and control over bass frequencies and the speed and transparency that compliments the tube preamp's bloom and naturalness. And as an added bonus, it runs nice and "cool".
Reinventing the wheel has context in that there has been a progression of designs over the decades: tubes > solid state > switching > ? . To say that we don't need another amp technology is to say that tube and solid state stereo amplification is perfect, which is absurd. Keep an open mind and you'll see with open eyes. Or more appropriately, hear with open ears. :-)
Regards,
Tom
and using an OLD Class D that fits well in/with my system, which existed with previous Class D amps
but initially was "built around" a Will Vincent ST-70.
It's all been about sounding good to sounding better. Sounding best will have to wait.
As for powered Class D speakers, they don't interest me with the exception of the sub I use.
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
Sorry I meant to say using it as a power amp. I'm all for the powered speaker development end.
Frankly any amps of the sort of price you mention will be little better than crap.
I have a digital integrated amp that I'm very pleased with and it has just replaced a pre/power amp system costing over £13,000 - but it costs £3500, not £35!
In the early days of digital amps, I bought a Tripath unit that sounded pretty dreadful but was able to provide 30 watts or so, powered by a 12 volt battery. However when I connected my Mark Levinson CDP to it, the player didn't like it one bit. It overheated and damaged itself. I had to return it to the UK importers who sent it back to ML in the US to get it repaired. Thankfully at no cost to me, but it took many weeks and was the result of using a grotty digital amplifier.
Save up for a used conventional amp if you can't afford a half decent digital one.
nope... i'll have to disagree with you there! i was quite happy with the sound quality out of my ORIGINAL $15 sonic impact amp even if it lacked oomph on 85dB missions. it was a very detailed and easygoing sound, and what got me into class D. i traded my onkyo in for a panasonic SA-XR after that, and have gravitated towards class D ever since.i don't for a second buy the "you get what you pay for" argument regarding audio either. i'd been visiting 4 different shops on the same block back in the 80s, and wanted to buy a yamaha receiver (cheaper than "the best"... harmon kardon... and way more open on top than overrated NAD... had one a few years back... DESPISED it and upgraded to onkyo) back then, but was never really wowed by ANY speakers i heard, though up to mega $$$ klipsch and assorted towers, and was actually blown away by a former friend's $100 infinitys on a denon with a B&O table!
it was the first time i'd heard LACK of the annoying "giant marshmallow bass" i didn't yet know was one of the things tat made speakers SOUND LIKE SPEAKERS, lack of cabinet resonance, lightning fast REAL (quality over quantity) bass and the first time i heard REAL imaging! it was then and there i realized all of the $1,000+ towers were ripoffs because those CHEAP little minis stomped then in EVERY WAY except bass extension... but that's what subs are for.
class D is INHERENTLY a superior sounding tech as far as i'm concerned as i hate ANY of the tubes & ports type thickening of sound so many others love, but yeah... $50 chinese amps aren't N cores. that's a given.
ugh! i can never find a pic of those infinity minis, back when they were still a LEGIT high end (read: acoustic suspension) company that were what instantly turned me into an audiophile
i'm coming a "big $$$ gear is a ripoff" perspective because of that, & my experience with $15 sonic impact totally destroying wet blanket NAD 10x over
OK... i found them... they were infinity RS1000s... i can never fiind them as i keep calling them RC1000s, but saved a pic on my thumb drive for the next time the topic comes up. i loved those CHEAP little speakers and tried to buy my buddy's pair, at a profit even, as none of the 4 shops in town sold infinity
Edits: 12/30/17 12/30/17
"class D is INHERENTLY a superior sounding tech as far as i'm concerned"Dr Hypex himself doesn't say that, in fact the opposite. Class D is electrically far more efficient, and if you can manage around the problems---which haven't been until the last 10 years---it's a good economic solution. (And I'm a fan and own two Hypex-Based amplifiers)
S&V: Generally speaking, what are the key benefits of Class D versus the traditional Class AB and Class A designs that have long been favored by audiophiles?
BP: Efficiency and therefore the ability to construct amps that are powerful for their size. Only that. Modern Class D amps, in particular mine—ahem—sound good not because they're Class D, but in spite of it. I can't repeat that often enough. Left to its own devices, a switching power stage tries to do just about anything except amplify audio. You choose Class D to save energy but it's all elbow grease after that. People don't realize how much more challenging Class D is compared to Class AB. It's truly an order of magnitude.
Edits: 12/30/17
Great response ....
Bruno is quite impressed by his own genius---but in this case I think it is deserved. Michelangelo didn't think much of most of his rivals either, having none worthy until Bernini.Anyway, I appreciate BP's nonlinear dynamical systems/physics-oriented solution, understanding that orientation---very different than classical linear frequency-domain electrical engineering---was the key. I once worked on chaos-based communication systems (carrier wave is nonlinear chaos).
He also says something else pretty interesting about A/AB amplifiers:
BP: Well, if the amplifier is truly great that's absolutely right. Sonic signatures are what you get when you approach the same ideal from different angles. There are a few distortion mechanisms conspicuously missing in Class D, mostly those related to the input stage of a Class A(B) solid-state amplifier and nonlinear capacitances. Those are also missing in valve [tube] amplifiers so it's quite common for people to notice that a Class D amplifier is somehow reminiscent of valve amplification in terms of "sweetness" for want of a better word.
I've heard several reports of valve aficionados ditching their glassware and switching to Ncore. All I can conclude from that is that those people clearly weren't actively seeking the distortion of valves as many believe, but instead had a legitimate beef with certain sonic aspects common to most solid-state designs. That's one thing I have to explain again and again to my fellow doubters: when audiophiles report a particular listening experience, that experience is real. Trust that. Just don't trust the explanation they proffer.
Edits: 12/31/17
Sadly the Class D amps also introduce their own, IMO unpleasant, distortion that is absent in linear amp technology and why I stayed with tubes after trying a few different Class D technologies.
I agree. Maybe a cheapie system to listen to a ball game in your garage. That's about it. Just get a cheap receiver at BB ....
Dale Clark
www.arcpictures.com
i HAVE a cheap receiver... a technics, and i hate it! it sounds as thick and lifeless as NAD/sony on my JBL northridges. my planet audio class D car amp sounds much clearer.
i think too, you might be exaggerating just "how bad" cheap class D amps sound, and maybe have an anti-class D bias the same way i despise ports and would like to take an axe to every "distortion box" in existence.
my $15 sonic impact ran circles around my NAD before taking a dump on it, and a lot of audiophiles, including owners of $1,200 ascend acoustics sierra 2s & KEF LS50s, are happy with their little amps.
i'm just trying to undo the same unforgivable thickening my NAD used to cause that i'm getting from my technics now and so far, i've loved all 3 class Ds i've owned
Sounds like you already know what you want. Take $600 and buy a few thru Amazon and return the ones that don't pass the test
Dale Clark
www.arcpictures.com
who has $600 to throw around? i'm just scraping by in one of the WORST economies in the country here.
besides... i LOVE class D and take great pleasure in seeking the absolute biggest bang for the buck. it's POSSIBLE that i might be totally satisfied with just a miniphil, sabaj Da3 DAC & breeze audio TPA 3116 system, and if it leans towards clinical... warming it up with a little dot MkII tube preamp. (as pictured as my "phase 1 system)
had only my NHT superzeros had a REAL tweeter like dayton's (formerly MB quart's) $16 titanium which is both super fast AND super smooth, even on my panasonic SA-XR, i would have had an awesome system. sadly zeros can't get it up for cowbells, and the energy RC10s i bought that could had lousy flimsy cabinets that forced a trade between 2 evils... port resonance & cabinet resonance and i DESPISE ALL resonance
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
