Class D Amps - will they be the future.
- Thread starter Cereal Killer
- Start date
If this is true and Class D doesn't save much in the way of power consumption, then is there much point in it for use with reasonably efficient typical hifi speakers?
It comes into its own when high damping factor is required, especially for subs, or for space saving in actives. But can it really be touted as an eco-friendly alternative to class b or tube PP when it doesn't really reduce power consumption in comparison?
PigletsDad
My intelligence test came back negative.
Tubes have a lot extra dissipation from the filaments, especially in big output devices, so start WAY back in the efficiency races. Even class B push pull designs emit fair amounts of heat when idling.
Static dissipation of solid state class B amps and class D is low enough that it hardly matters in either case - only say 10W or so. Where class D shines is efficiency when producing an output; at best class b is 50% efficient (for a maximum power sine wave), but is much worse at moderate levels, while the class D dissipation hardly changes with output.
For efficient speakers, in typical UK sized rooms, much of this academic, as the power needed is not that great unless you listen really loud, so small amps will do, which don't give off much heat regardless of type.
But many people use low efficiency speakers, have bigger rooms, or listen very loud, any one of which drives them towards high amplifier power, let alone combinations, and brings class D back into contention.
Although the circuits are complex to design and build, there are ready made chips (for example from TI) or modules (ICEpower, Hypex) which most amplifiers are based on, and these are easy to implement.
Static dissipation of solid state class B amps and class D is low enough that it hardly matters in either case - only say 10W or so. Where class D shines is efficiency when producing an output; at best class b is 50% efficient (for a maximum power sine wave), but is much worse at moderate levels, while the class D dissipation hardly changes with output.
For efficient speakers, in typical UK sized rooms, much of this academic, as the power needed is not that great unless you listen really loud, so small amps will do, which don't give off much heat regardless of type.
But many people use low efficiency speakers, have bigger rooms, or listen very loud, any one of which drives them towards high amplifier power, let alone combinations, and brings class D back into contention.
Although the circuits are complex to design and build, there are ready made chips (for example from TI) or modules (ICEpower, Hypex) which most amplifiers are based on, and these are easy to implement.
Lyngdorf amplifiers aren't just your typical "Class D". It's rather a little more complicated than that.
Like I've said, I owned an SDAI 2175 once and it was a nice amp and incredibly well built given its price. It felt much more expensive than a lot of amplifiers costing way more.
The sound wasn't involving enough (after longer listening periods) for my taste so I sold it. Maybe I had a system mismatch, I truly don't know but their philosophy is not to add anything to the sound so I guess the SDAI 2175 was too honest and analytical for my taste.
To be honest I really didn't give it a fair chance to begin with. I had a Squeezebox directly connected to it without a DAC. Not exactly the best option, I know.
Their CD-1 is however one of the finest cd-players I've heard.
Has anyone heard their speakers yet?
Like I've said, I owned an SDAI 2175 once and it was a nice amp and incredibly well built given its price. It felt much more expensive than a lot of amplifiers costing way more.
The sound wasn't involving enough (after longer listening periods) for my taste so I sold it. Maybe I had a system mismatch, I truly don't know but their philosophy is not to add anything to the sound so I guess the SDAI 2175 was too honest and analytical for my taste.
To be honest I really didn't give it a fair chance to begin with. I had a Squeezebox directly connected to it without a DAC. Not exactly the best option, I know.
Their CD-1 is however one of the finest cd-players I've heard.
Has anyone heard their speakers yet?
Can't help but agree with pretty much all of that. Heard several full digital TACT systems and they never really did it for me for music.
I've also compared BC Icepower vs Tripath. The Icepower was better at "hi-fi", but IMO was less involving.
Interesting how I've seen a couple of persons recently move on from Tripath to Krell and similar alternatives. I wonder how much is simply down to system synergy.
tenpercenter
Don't ya rile 'em.....
I had a demo of the current Bel Canto amps and liked the smoothness of the overall sound balanced against detail with dynamics. However, I too felt overall that it lacked a little soul and "rock+roll" - I ended up not buying them.
I went for a Luxman integrated instead - smooth, composed but with soul and it can rock when required !
I went for a Luxman integrated instead - smooth, composed but with soul and it can rock when required !
Exactly. So to answer the thread's question: Is Class D THE future? No, it isn't. But PART of the future, yes most likely.
Space is the Place
pfm Member
I think the thing about the Lyngdorf range was it was under priced for the sound and quality you got as far as the amps go, you need to spend big money to get the same kind of control or finesse.
The key is matching them to the right kind of speaker, with small two way conventional speakers they do nothing special. You have to go 2+2, or use something like the Jamo R 909(or the lyngdorf speaker but they are expensive IMO for what you get)
The most important thing about Lyngdorf though is the DSP, something like a TDA 2200 has a built in digital crossover, that you can use to run the main speakers and use another poweramp to run the bass modules, you can measure using a microphone and apply parametric EQ and delay to the get the target curve you want, you have control over everything and end up with a very even response in the room.
Im not talking about roomperfect here, which can sound dull as dishwater, im talking about the system Lyngdorf and TacT were using before room perfect, Lyngdorf dont publicise that you can still do all the measurements yourself and control everything because it takes a bit of understanding to get the best results out of it and they dont want people messing around and getting shit sound, this is the best bit about lyngdorf in my experience.
Here is a link to the program you can download it from the Lyngdorf site and have a play around with it.
http://www.lyngdorf.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=116&Itemid=35
scroll down a bit you want to download PC Pack 1.5 which contains Lyngdorf DSP, when you open DSP, youll see the flexbility of it and all the adjustments you can make you can work on the settings on the PC and then send them to the amp doing the adjustments in real time while you listen or measure.
DSP window
here another link for room correction using Tact 2.2x doing the DSP
http://wslam.blogspot.com/2007/02/wonders-of-dsp.html
There are also Yahoo groups for both Lyngdorf and TacT if your really interested.
The key is matching them to the right kind of speaker, with small two way conventional speakers they do nothing special. You have to go 2+2, or use something like the Jamo R 909(or the lyngdorf speaker but they are expensive IMO for what you get)
The most important thing about Lyngdorf though is the DSP, something like a TDA 2200 has a built in digital crossover, that you can use to run the main speakers and use another poweramp to run the bass modules, you can measure using a microphone and apply parametric EQ and delay to the get the target curve you want, you have control over everything and end up with a very even response in the room.
Im not talking about roomperfect here, which can sound dull as dishwater, im talking about the system Lyngdorf and TacT were using before room perfect, Lyngdorf dont publicise that you can still do all the measurements yourself and control everything because it takes a bit of understanding to get the best results out of it and they dont want people messing around and getting shit sound, this is the best bit about lyngdorf in my experience.
Here is a link to the program you can download it from the Lyngdorf site and have a play around with it.
http://www.lyngdorf.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=116&Itemid=35
scroll down a bit you want to download PC Pack 1.5 which contains Lyngdorf DSP, when you open DSP, youll see the flexbility of it and all the adjustments you can make you can work on the settings on the PC and then send them to the amp doing the adjustments in real time while you listen or measure.
DSP window
here another link for room correction using Tact 2.2x doing the DSP
http://wslam.blogspot.com/2007/02/wonders-of-dsp.html
There are also Yahoo groups for both Lyngdorf and TacT if your really interested.
When is producing Music from the various apparatus, going to be mentioned. This discussion has moved from not whether digital amps 'are the future' to a fear that 'old technology' will be swept away. All those expensive analogue noise inducting cables sold, will be obsolete and all that snake oil tinkering 'chatter' will be banished. The thought that people will be forced to actually just sit and listen to music hassle-free would appear to horrify them.
For all the techno 'chatter' that takes place, does it equal in duration anywhere near, the same time taken to listen to music in their collections? I suspect not in most cases.
This talk 'that some Amp X is dull besides Amp Y' depends on a myriad of other factors, which we all know and do not need to reiterate here. To can a digital amp because it happens to 'be digital' is a stupid exercise. I have heard one of the vaunted 'black box' PRAT set ups versus a digital amp costing a fraction of the former's price. Sound levels meter checked- on repeated back & forward comparsions-same speakers The dynamic capacity of an amp is limited by the extent of its inherent operating 'noise floor'. Using extremely wide dynamic recordings 'from a tiniest whisper to a roar...... the PRAT amp at the same time checked playing portion of a test cd was actually 'noise intruding' and masking detail clearly heard , using the digital amp. That is lower Hi Fi in my book, for a start! The digital amp was also producing the silkiest of classical sounds; like a sparkling diamond set on black velvet. Next amp I buy will be likely to be digital. The British Hi Fi industry better be ready for the future developments, pull its pants up quickly or be left behind 'in the dust' of closed down operations.. Oh!, but they happen to be not famous for producing 'chip sets'....Pity! They would be forced to import the (gulp!) from Asia!!!!!! People, world wide are no longer, 'into Pop fiddling and pissing around trying to get something to properly work while Mum does the dishes and the kids do their homework'. Fireside British ways of doing things like Meccano and train set hobbies are gone! That goes for most of their ' little boutique' Hi fi industry as well.
For all the techno 'chatter' that takes place, does it equal in duration anywhere near, the same time taken to listen to music in their collections? I suspect not in most cases.
This talk 'that some Amp X is dull besides Amp Y' depends on a myriad of other factors, which we all know and do not need to reiterate here. To can a digital amp because it happens to 'be digital' is a stupid exercise. I have heard one of the vaunted 'black box' PRAT set ups versus a digital amp costing a fraction of the former's price. Sound levels meter checked- on repeated back & forward comparsions-same speakers The dynamic capacity of an amp is limited by the extent of its inherent operating 'noise floor'. Using extremely wide dynamic recordings 'from a tiniest whisper to a roar...... the PRAT amp at the same time checked playing portion of a test cd was actually 'noise intruding' and masking detail clearly heard , using the digital amp. That is lower Hi Fi in my book, for a start! The digital amp was also producing the silkiest of classical sounds; like a sparkling diamond set on black velvet. Next amp I buy will be likely to be digital. The British Hi Fi industry better be ready for the future developments, pull its pants up quickly or be left behind 'in the dust' of closed down operations.. Oh!, but they happen to be not famous for producing 'chip sets'....Pity! They would be forced to import the (gulp!) from Asia!!!!!! People, world wide are no longer, 'into Pop fiddling and pissing around trying to get something to properly work while Mum does the dishes and the kids do their homework'. Fireside British ways of doing things like Meccano and train set hobbies are gone! That goes for most of their ' little boutique' Hi fi industry as well.
Great. They were just for you, MAN
The British are not in the position to build anything 'digital' from totally in house: FAT CHANCE! .....unless they salvage things from the discard dumpster of some Asian manufacturer....find what they can......and turn a model' therefore into 'a limited edition' with an exclusive number of spares for their 'exclusive buyers'........
I will not be surprised to see some bright spark British manufacturer come up with the next revolutionary thing in Hi Fi. Taking youall back to those indoor play afternoons at school making your own model aeroplane.
D.I.Y Kit cut out balsa wood circuit boards , pre drilled, with all necessary bits to finish your next amp project. The de luxe version is an amp/tuner with advanced crystal radio technology.. All glues & paint accessories (up to latest child heath & safety standards) non toxic water based BLACK, of course. Vibration isolation mounts will be, they ,maintain of finest grade plasticine.You will be able to add extra power modules of 5x 5 watts each, connecting with their propriety silly string cables made available. Start with Episode 1 'starter book' at your newsagent and keep buying each week. It is said to be unconditionally stable throughout its nanny state of operation.
How many years since the British surprised us with something noteworthy in Hi Fi:, and adaptable in many areas? Once they were the leaders in Hi Fi. For too many years it is 'more of the same' , more expensive, reduced in size, or less capacity for the same money. Until the prices asked (against other countries similar comparative products) is the first thing that strikes you. Then it becomes a no-brainer. They are are out of any purchase equation.
I will not be surprised to see some bright spark British manufacturer come up with the next revolutionary thing in Hi Fi. Taking youall back to those indoor play afternoons at school making your own model aeroplane.
D.I.Y Kit cut out balsa wood circuit boards , pre drilled, with all necessary bits to finish your next amp project. The de luxe version is an amp/tuner with advanced crystal radio technology.. All glues & paint accessories (up to latest child heath & safety standards) non toxic water based BLACK, of course. Vibration isolation mounts will be, they ,maintain of finest grade plasticine.You will be able to add extra power modules of 5x 5 watts each, connecting with their propriety silly string cables made available. Start with Episode 1 'starter book' at your newsagent and keep buying each week. It is said to be unconditionally stable throughout its nanny state of operation.
How many years since the British surprised us with something noteworthy in Hi Fi:, and adaptable in many areas? Once they were the leaders in Hi Fi. For too many years it is 'more of the same' , more expensive, reduced in size, or less capacity for the same money. Until the prices asked (against other countries similar comparative products) is the first thing that strikes you. Then it becomes a no-brainer. They are are out of any purchase equation.
Cereal Killer
432
ter, can i ask what kit you use?
Jonboi
Because Music Matters
I have to say I agree with the fundamental points Ter makes. That the British HiFi industry, with the likes of Peter Walker, Alastair Robertson-Aikman, John Bowers and others was devoted to the art of High Fidelity is beyond question and in their time they set the standards the rest of the world looked up to and followed.
Nowadays it is all about subjective 'taste', subjective 'reviewing' and after a few decades of almost pure subjectivism, HiFi no longer appears to be about High Fidelity per se, but rather that it is more or less anything you choose to make or describe it as, and that creates a pleasing effect that can be commercially marketed and popularised; the concept of PRaT being perhaps the most obvious example of this trend.
From the days when the pursuit of High fidelity was a field populated by engineers, and scientists with a gentleman's club atmosphere that pursued through mutual interest and co-operation, 'the closest approach to the original sound', i.e. High Fidelity, we have moved to a subjective basis for manufacture with those involved being above all successful entrepreneurs with the driving motivation being the end profit, rather than the true advancement of High Fidelity as it was once known, per se.
It is relatively easy to 'dumb down' an amplifier circuit, so as to give a commercial incentive to 'upgrade' when the technological resources readily exist to make an amplifier to an excellent standard from the outset, and for a sensible and yet profitable price. Of course, having paid once for the 'entry' level product, if you want to 'improve' you have to move up the chain to the less compromised model - a very convenient business model not particularly founded in excellence of technical design in the first instance.
CD players can be 'tweaked' to offer a house sound - perhaps the one that offers the most seeming 'pleasure' as against accuracy. Once, it could be said in the fifties to be the British pipe and slippers sound - that of the classical enthusiast. Natural in it's spatial perspectives with point source speakers like dual concentric Tannoys, it was a sound quality that held sway for more than a few decades, supported by science and measurement.
But the average punter, perhaps used to the distorted sound of a pub band, which became their acoustic reference, demanded 'more'. More of what exactly? Why, excitement of course. 'I want MY hifi to sound impressive. I want to show it off to my mates to demonstrate what a clever and knowledgeable chap I am to have such audibly 'superior' HIFi'.
And so the world of subjectivism in sound reproduction was born. 'If it sounds better it is better' was a well known mantra of one of the leading flat earth companies. No attempt to qualify what better actually meant was made beyond pointing out that if it 'played the tune' better, and was more 'involving' to the listener, then it was 'better'. No matter if it made a violin sound like it had steel strings, or a tenor sound like a castrati - the average punter had never heard these instruments or singers anyway, so the subjective sales tool used by various flat earth companies were successfully used to sell product to those who thought 'getting the tune' was alll there was to know about music. Science and measurement scarecly entered the equation. Snobbishness, and consumerism along with the attendant rampant overpricing has dominated the so called high end scene for some decades.
From a manufacturing point of view, it must be very expedient to buy in a 'mainstream' manufacturers chipset, or CD/DVD mechanisim for example, and tweak the analogue output stage to give ones desired 'house sound', put it in a very expensive looking box, tart it up with subjective marketing spin, including often dissing the original donor brand(s) and flog it an a hugely inflated price to the 'high end buyer, bedazzled with the house sound, brand name, price, reputation and advertising lead reviews.
Looking at this scenario It must be quite threatening from a commercial point of view that along comes digital amplification, that can be built cheaply, and provides performance to the highest standards for prices the 'average' consumer can afford, and importantly allows little room for so called 'specialist' tweaking of the sound, marketing and Kings ransom prices thereof.
In my view, and it is not to denigrate them, Ter is right in that the UK scene has produced very little in the way of true invention or innovation in the last few decades as regards Hifi. Our beloved Mick, climbs upon his soapbox and puts down DIY tinkerers as being bodgers, but in reality much of the mainstream Flat Earth, or ex(?) (commercially expedient) Flat Earth companies are the original bodgers, utilising mainstream parts in dressed up packages to sell their subjectively pleasing house sound, whilst not advancing the art of high fidelity one bit.
Nothing wrong with that from a commercial point of view, and who can complain if you like the sound 'effect', but lets not confuse commercial imperatives and subjectivism in sound, aka Hifi, with the art of High Fidelity as it was once practised in the UK. I would argue that digital amplification, and indeed computer source technology is a return to true value in high fidelity, and that as the technology allows little in the way of so called specialist tweaking.. aka bodging as Mick would say, then the commercial marketing of subjectively pleasing HiFi sound at often ridiculous prices may well take a back seat to the pursuit of true High Fidelity, backed up by science, logic and reason, and a return to true value for money and long term satisfaction for the consumer.
Best
Jon....
Nowadays it is all about subjective 'taste', subjective 'reviewing' and after a few decades of almost pure subjectivism, HiFi no longer appears to be about High Fidelity per se, but rather that it is more or less anything you choose to make or describe it as, and that creates a pleasing effect that can be commercially marketed and popularised; the concept of PRaT being perhaps the most obvious example of this trend.
From the days when the pursuit of High fidelity was a field populated by engineers, and scientists with a gentleman's club atmosphere that pursued through mutual interest and co-operation, 'the closest approach to the original sound', i.e. High Fidelity, we have moved to a subjective basis for manufacture with those involved being above all successful entrepreneurs with the driving motivation being the end profit, rather than the true advancement of High Fidelity as it was once known, per se.
It is relatively easy to 'dumb down' an amplifier circuit, so as to give a commercial incentive to 'upgrade' when the technological resources readily exist to make an amplifier to an excellent standard from the outset, and for a sensible and yet profitable price. Of course, having paid once for the 'entry' level product, if you want to 'improve' you have to move up the chain to the less compromised model - a very convenient business model not particularly founded in excellence of technical design in the first instance.
CD players can be 'tweaked' to offer a house sound - perhaps the one that offers the most seeming 'pleasure' as against accuracy. Once, it could be said in the fifties to be the British pipe and slippers sound - that of the classical enthusiast. Natural in it's spatial perspectives with point source speakers like dual concentric Tannoys, it was a sound quality that held sway for more than a few decades, supported by science and measurement.
But the average punter, perhaps used to the distorted sound of a pub band, which became their acoustic reference, demanded 'more'. More of what exactly? Why, excitement of course. 'I want MY hifi to sound impressive. I want to show it off to my mates to demonstrate what a clever and knowledgeable chap I am to have such audibly 'superior' HIFi'.
And so the world of subjectivism in sound reproduction was born. 'If it sounds better it is better' was a well known mantra of one of the leading flat earth companies. No attempt to qualify what better actually meant was made beyond pointing out that if it 'played the tune' better, and was more 'involving' to the listener, then it was 'better'. No matter if it made a violin sound like it had steel strings, or a tenor sound like a castrati - the average punter had never heard these instruments or singers anyway, so the subjective sales tool used by various flat earth companies were successfully used to sell product to those who thought 'getting the tune' was alll there was to know about music. Science and measurement scarecly entered the equation. Snobbishness, and consumerism along with the attendant rampant overpricing has dominated the so called high end scene for some decades.
From a manufacturing point of view, it must be very expedient to buy in a 'mainstream' manufacturers chipset, or CD/DVD mechanisim for example, and tweak the analogue output stage to give ones desired 'house sound', put it in a very expensive looking box, tart it up with subjective marketing spin, including often dissing the original donor brand(s) and flog it an a hugely inflated price to the 'high end buyer, bedazzled with the house sound, brand name, price, reputation and advertising lead reviews.
Looking at this scenario It must be quite threatening from a commercial point of view that along comes digital amplification, that can be built cheaply, and provides performance to the highest standards for prices the 'average' consumer can afford, and importantly allows little room for so called 'specialist' tweaking of the sound, marketing and Kings ransom prices thereof.
In my view, and it is not to denigrate them, Ter is right in that the UK scene has produced very little in the way of true invention or innovation in the last few decades as regards Hifi. Our beloved Mick, climbs upon his soapbox and puts down DIY tinkerers as being bodgers, but in reality much of the mainstream Flat Earth, or ex(?) (commercially expedient) Flat Earth companies are the original bodgers, utilising mainstream parts in dressed up packages to sell their subjectively pleasing house sound, whilst not advancing the art of high fidelity one bit.
Nothing wrong with that from a commercial point of view, and who can complain if you like the sound 'effect', but lets not confuse commercial imperatives and subjectivism in sound, aka Hifi, with the art of High Fidelity as it was once practised in the UK. I would argue that digital amplification, and indeed computer source technology is a return to true value in high fidelity, and that as the technology allows little in the way of so called specialist tweaking.. aka bodging as Mick would say, then the commercial marketing of subjectively pleasing HiFi sound at often ridiculous prices may well take a back seat to the pursuit of true High Fidelity, backed up by science, logic and reason, and a return to true value for money and long term satisfaction for the consumer.
Best
Jon....