|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
80.218.199.14
In Reply to: RE: Switching amps - coming of age posted by J. Phelan on December 18, 2014 at 12:18:06
Had the Devialet at home...it got handily beaten by the less than SOTA Einstein "The absolute tune"
We will have a shootout soon with the new Devialet against Octave tube monos, Lamm M1.1 and the NAT Symbiosis SE on a pair of Thiel CS3.7. I doubt the Devialet will win...despite what "reviewers" are saying.
"but we're moving out of the linear-amp era. On sound quality - not just convenience."
From what I have heard (and owned...three different types of Class D) it is ONLY for convenience and for a lot of manufacturers a way to boost margins. Buy off-the-shelf module, put in a nice box and MAYBE put a decent linear power supply (or not).
"D" amps have no issue with bias-wandering (crossover distortion)" maybe but have you seen the other distortions they produce??
The amount of negative feedback required to make it work at all is another reason to stay away...
Follow Ups:
I have to agree with you for a change. However Steve Huff is saying the Latest Devialet 200 is much better than the Devialet Premier D , I have not heard the 200 so can not comment. However I quite like the latest Arcam A49 Class G heard through Sonus Faber Guanari Evolution speakers.
I can tell you that a friend of mine had the Devialet 200 on some Usher diamond speakers and it was...ok. I will hear a devialet (400?) on Monday compared to the following amps: Lamm M1.1, Octave MRE280 monos, NAT Symbiosis SE and maybe the KR Audio VA350i on a pair of Thiel CS3.7 speakers. Source will be either a Meitner MA-1 DAC or big ass Transrotor 3 motor, magnetic coupling turntable with SME-V arm and Transfiguration Proteus cartridge. If the Devialet wins there (doubtful) it will be indeed a good sounding amp.
Talk about a system for detail freaks!
Sadly, I am inclined to agree with you and the friend who is hosting the meeting tomorrow definitely falls into that camp of sound...although less so than he used to.
...at the shoot-out?
Don't see any results.
I was preparing to give a full report but due to the ceaseless and baseless attacks on this forum by a couple of mobsters, I will only share a short summary.
The simple results were that at moderate levels the NAT was the best sounding, both tonally and spatially (soundstage, imaging) and the Octave monos were pretty close but perhaps a bit bright on peaks. The Lamms tonally were similar to the NAT but without quite the same smoothness although the hardness we heard earlier was lessened at lower levels. The Devialet was in tight control of the speaker but had a kind of overdamped quality (Lamms also felt this way a bit). Tonally, they were smooth without undue brightness but missing some of the decay of instruments and that "roundness" to the sound that convinces you that you hear a real instrument. So, slightly synthetic in the end...particularly with acoustic music. Still far better than other Class D I have heard.
The main criticism against the NAT was that it didn't sound as expansive as the tubes or the Lamm in the width of the soundstage (depth was good) but after 2 hours warmup this difference largely disappeared and was no longer a weak spot in the sound. The Lamms also benefitted from a good long warmup prior to listening as they were significantly harder and tonally less complete shortly after turn on. The Octaves didn't change sound much from first turn on but lost a bit of the bright edge after 30 minutes or so. It sounds like the Thiels perhaps challenge these monos a bit as the edginess after warmup came mostly on peaks or when playing really loud (only did this in short bursts to see how the amps handled it).
If correct tonality of instruments is not a listener priority (hard for me to understand how it cannot be but some claim it is so for them) then the Devialet could offer a lot to a listener for a consistent sound that is not really true high end IMO but puts most mid-fi to shame. The Lamms faired better this time than before (maybe power line affects them?) and were not bad but still with a bit of hardness that I think long term would turn me off. The Octaves were fine but slightly bright and sounded strained when pushed a bit...nice imaging and soundstaging if a bit overblown. The NAT was the best balanced in tone, dynamics, bass (a bit more punch could be beneficial though), imaging was precise and life sized, soundstage was really good once warmed up and has a very slight overall warmth like the very best tube amps. It does not though have that truly 3d imaging of a top SET, which is what, IMO, keeps it from the top most echelons of amps I know. My previous KR Audio VA350i was superior to the NAT in this area and quite similar in all the rest...surprising given that they are 180 degree different amps (KR is all SS with a tube output and the NAT is all tube with a MOSFET output).
Here Morricab,Ying for your yang ...
Happy New Year ...
Tubes vs. Transistors White Paper
http://sanderssoundsystems.com/technical-white-papers/172-tubes-vs-transistors
You will find that conventional, direct-radiator (not horn-loaded), magnetic speaker systems of around 90 dB sensitivity, require around 500 watts/channel to avoid clipping. More power is needed in larger rooms or if you like to play your music more loudly than most.
The key point I'm trying to make is that audiophiles usually are using underpowered amplifiers and are therefore listening to clipping amplifiers most of the time. When an amplifier is clipping, it is behaving (and sounding) grossly differently than its measured performance would suggest. This is because we always measure amplifiers when they are operating within their design parameters -- never when clipping. A clipping amp has horrible performance, so attempting to measure it is a waste of time.Now let's analyze tube and transistor equipment with regards to clipping, since that is the condition to which we usually listen. There is "hard" and "soft" clipping. If you go back to the oscilloscope investigations, you will see that solid state amps clip "hard" in that there is an absolute, rock-solid, limit to how loudly they will play. As soon as you reach that point, they immediately clip. This point is their power supply rail voltage.
A tube amp clips "softly." This is because tubes produce a cloud of electrons around their cathodes. This cloud has surplus electrons available so that for sudden current surges (such as musical peaks), a tube can deliver more current (electrons) and voltage for a few milliseconds before they clip. So their clipping threshold is not rigidly fixed as it is in a transistor amp. It varies depending on the dynamics of the music played.
- Roger SandersAgain why you disliked the sound of the clipping Lamm , vs your toooby ..
Regards ..
Edits: 12/30/14 12/30/14
.., how come there aren't more tweeter failures being reported?Either clipping is not as damaging to drivers as some suggest, or there is not as much clipping going on as you suggest ("most of the time").
Edits: 12/30/14
Asking Me or Mr Sanders ... ? :)
You need power Hoss, been around this game along time at SOTA level, no realism without it, either 100db+ sensitivity from large speakers or 500+ at a min ( speaker load-Z) for realistic realism without hardness (SS) or soft and dull (tooby). It's easy to detect once you recognize the signature and even with tooby stuff, smallest I ever had were 200watt monoblocs, largest were a Pr of MC3500.
Morricab thinks the standard version is as fast as anyone needs , the AMG is overkill and not necessary... :)
Buy the biggest one you can ......Ciao
Edits: 12/30/14 12/30/14
Load of horse crap! Fed by pushers of high power like McIntosh...need that head room for peaks, right?? RIGHT...let's forget about everything but peaks...nevermind that at loud peaks is when your ears are the LEAST sensitive to distortion (read about it...it's out there).
Just sayin'...If clipping is the pervasive problem that Mr. Sanders claims it is, I'd think I'd be hearing about a lot more fried drivers than I do. It could be that I'm not aware of multitudes of fried drivers littering repairmen's workbenches everywhere, I guess.
Edits: 12/30/14
Realistic high power requirement for realistic reproduction is not new , its easily one of the main criteria for SOTA sound ...
More : http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/manufacture/0708/
The ability of an amplifier to produce undistorted dynamic passages of music is frequently mistaken as its continuous (rms) power output rating. However, this specification is useful only to approximate the amplifier's ability to reach the desired loudness of the sound at the listening position — and no more. Alan Lofft from Axiom Audio has shown in Enjoy the Music.com (1) that if you want to reproduce the illusion in your living room of standing next to a grand piano, then peaks of 109dB would be required. To reproduce realistically a peak loudness of 109dB using the speaker with a sensitivity of 88dB to 89dB located 12 feet from the listening chair, the amplifier must produce about 400 watts peak power. To reproduce realistic peaks of a rock band, the amplifier must produce 4000 watts of peak power. Nearly the same power capabilities are needed to approximate the realistic experience of a symphonic conductor at the podium. - Alan Lofft / Axiom Audio
Edits: 12/30/14 12/30/14
The high power delivery of class-d amplfiers is , IMO , responsible for bringing many to the class -d table many are experiencing for the first time music without clipping and the party begins after years of listening to underpowered dead soft systems ..Really big linear amplifiers are just too expensive for the majority of (40k+) audiophiles , class-d is here to stay regardless of Morricab , next to go will be those silly speakers thinned out to sound good on toob ( clipping) bloat ...
Regards ...
Edits: 12/30/14 12/30/14
You may very well be right. Understand that I could care less if low-powered amps became a thing of that past. I have no dog in this fight. The questions I have at the moment are:- If a majority of audiophiles are used to listening to horribly under-driven speakers, then why haven't manufacturers and others been on top of the issue all of these years? Why haven't we been hearing more about the issue from manufacturers, retailers, or the audio press - all of whom might stand to gain something from the sales and promotion of megawatt amplifiers? Some do recommend the use of megawatt amps, but an amp in the 50 - 200 watt range is typically considered to be more than adequate for speakers of average sensitivity.
- Could it be true that "clipping" isn't nearly as bad for speakers as is commonly thought? If the phenomena called "clipping" is as pervasive as some say it is and clipping is in fact bad for speakers, then why aren't more speakers being damaged by it?
Edits: 12/30/14 12/30/14
The Peak Power Demands of Well-recorded MusicThis attention-getting demonstration made many participants think twice about how much amplifier power is needed for the reproduction of well-recorded music that has good dynamic range.
Participants in this workshop were able to see in real time the very high peak-to-average power ratio (crest factor) of music while they were listening to it. The high crest factor of well-recorded music can place very high peak-power demands on a power amplifier even at modest listening levels when loudspeakers of average efficiency are employed. This workshop demonstrated why high-power amplifiers sometimes sound better. Amplifiers may clip more often than we think.
This demonstration was a real "Wow" for the attendees. The Rickie Lee Jones (RLJ) cut was played at realistic, but certainly not unpleasant, levels in the relatively small hotel exhibit room on speakers with an estimated sensitivity of about 89 dB. The average power typically read 1-2 Watts, while the power on peaks often topped 250 Watts (the power display monitored only one channel, so these numbers should be interpreted as Watts per channel). On this cut, most peaks occurred with an aggressive "thwack" to a snare drum positioned dead center. - Bob Cordell
http://www.cordellaudio.com/he2007/show_report.shtml
Edits: 12/30/14 12/30/14
Once again I admit that all of this is possible, but...Do you know why we haven't been seeing more speakers being damaged by this clipping?
If what some say about clipping is true, there should be plenty of physical evidence for it lying around. And, unless the speaker industry has been deliberately hiding driver repair/replacement statistics, there does not seem to be as much physical evidence lying around as there should be. It could be that very few of us listen to music as loud as absolute realism might require. It could be that very few recordings offer the dynamic range that would make megawatt amps seem absolutely useful.
Edits: 12/31/14
Possible !
Nothing posted is conjecture , anyway as to the strawman question , most speakers will not self destruct on instantaneous clipping of short duration most tweeters are damaged with sustained clipping or continuos program material exceeding their power handling ...
Anyway Time to step away from flea power and into hi-fidelity with realism ... :)
If it is true that amp clipping is one of the major obstacles to hifi and realism then I think that, by now, there would be a consensus regarding this. Is there a consensus?If it is true that this clipping is taking place the form of micro bursts of short duration, then it might also be true that any departures from hi-fi and realism due to amp clipping would be on the micro scale and/or of short duration.
I think I can agree that the pursuit of "hi-fidelity and realism" is a worthy goal but it seems unlikely that amp clipping is the most formidable of all barriers to be overcome in that pursuit. Amp clipping is an important issue, but the available evidence seems to suggest that there might be more important issues to worry about in the pursuit of hifi and realism.
Hifi might be compared to a cut diamond having many facets or aspects to consider. As this diamond turns in space, there's no telling which facet(s) of the diamond our minds are going to focus on first. It all depends on our perspective.
Edits: 12/31/14 12/31/14 12/31/14
Genungo,I have provided what could be classified as expert opinion and data , you decide if a signal requiring 250 watts for eg at moderate level is ok played back with a 50 watt amplfier.
As long as "you" are enjoying what you are listening to, then success ...
Regards
Edits: 12/31/14
And, I am happy to report that I heartily agree with that last sentence of yours.
other expert opinion and psychoacoustic studies would suggest that clipping is not as big an issue as A.Wayne says but that the fundamental character of an amps distortion at different levels is a much bigger barrier to realism.
It has been shown that loud music peaks are when the ear is least sensitive to distortion so if an amp only clips momentarily it is likely to be inaudible as clipping unless it is a sustained hard clip.
A.Wayne's argument conveniently ignores the 99% of the time the music level is below clipping...this is particularly true at moderate levels with compressed music and also with wide dynamic range material as well even at close to realistic levels...in fact the low level passages are often the main problem that prompt people to turn up the sound level to higher than realistic levels and then of course get clipping on peaks! It almost seems that he is saying that high power sounds better below clipping...regardless of the design.
...this is why I dislike shoot-outs, fun as they may be.
First you're using the amps with only one speaker, which may not be suited to them.
My Thiel 7.2s sound best with tubed amps and many well regarded ss amps sound too cold, dry or bright.
Second, you can't really do long term listening which allows you to really identify the amplifiers' sonic signatures.
And then there's the issue of proper warm-up.
So while the shoot-out did show some significant differences between the amps with Thiel 3.7s, YMMV.
Well, overall I agree that is why it was a casual gathering. It would take a lot more effort to do a very controlled set of studies. However, we did leave the amps cooking over an extended lunch break so that they were warmed up. Also, we did hear the difference in the signatures of the amps loud and clear...how they would impact someone in the long run is more difficult to tell.
I am not surprised by the sound you got from the Thiels. They are pretty revealing of electronic shortcomings.
Still cant get over the Irony everytime you post Cab, Talk about ignoring facts ,1. No level matching when comparing
2. No measurement of voltage being used
3. No measurement of dB levels being used in evaluation
4. No listing of recordings used in listening session
5. No attempt to optimize setups when switching in/out amplifiersIs this how opinionated science"tsk" work ... :)
You"re a floozy at best , then you try to hide it with dogma , you want to dispute Sanders , and Cordell then put up some data , hook a scope to Your setup and then inform your brood like a good piped piper .
The best anyone can say is that you have a very good imagination ,cab, unlike myself , my imagination is crap so it better sound "real" ...
None of that bloated soft stuff u like .... Lol
Edits: 01/04/15
I believe you are absolutely correct in your statement that shoot-outs are of limited value as far as making comparisons between amps as they are part of a system and their performance is dependent on many factors, some of which you mention,
Three of my audio buddies once took the same complete system to each of their homes and switched out three different amps. At each location, the majority chose a different amp as the most preferred. They then took these same three amps and tried them in each other's systems, one by one. Again, the results were different.
Clearly there are no absolutes.
try it! you know you want to!
Morri,What is low volume, high volume , i dont get your comparision , if you have a system tailored for a Tooby amp after months of careful selection and setup there is an inherent built in bias vs any newcomer , did you play around or just dropped in the other amplfiers, you still are not giving any data as to listening level or voltage settings after 500 hundred request i have to believe you sodded it out ..
So at the very best your report is well , another toooby bias slanted report with no validity, curious..,who buy into this stuff ... ?
Regards ..
Edits: 12/30/14 12/30/14
The Class-d lost , the end ............
F1eng on Pink fish media Forum says I have had my pair of D-Premiers updated to an "800" Did not notice and SQ difference. PFM Thread What amplifier do I want" ? page 3
Edits: 12/21/14 12/21/14
To MORRICAB According to Steve Huff the Devialet 200 is top of the pile and he was previously a valve addict like you , many on the Pink Fish Media Forum are into Devialet,I will stay with Class AB especially the Goldmund JOB 225 great sound great value from a small 125 wpc mos-fet amp.Will be very interested to know how you like the 400
Edits: 12/21/14
Several people on audiocircles have recently replaced their Job amps with the crown xls series of amps....class d....
try it! you know you want to!
Very Bad move. switching to Crown Class D
Edits: 12/22/14
I tried the Crown Drivecore (1500) on my KEF LS50s. The midrange sounded odd to me but the biggest take away was the 2-d soundstage, compared to the 20 y.o. A/B amp I am using now. Of course the amp wasn't broken in yet (which is said to take 100s of hours). So it may have improved a bit over time.
I would recommend the Crown as a cheap starter amp, for folks who have a limited budget, as it wasn't bad sounding compared to other cheap pro amps out there.
It gets worse , i know of one going from ARC(KT120) to crown class-d , he said for 690.00 for the crown the arc was way over priced ...
Regards
Edits: 12/22/14 12/22/14
Oh my, the sky is falling!
Not surprised. Tube amps, as everyone knows, are colored and produce a lot of distortion. At least, that is the stereotype, like class d amps aren't hi fi....Seems these generalizations are only really true for some, but not all. What do you know, there is no single "truth" that applies to all when it comes to subjective assessment of the quality of audio equipment....
try it! you know you want to!
Tube amps not necessarily colored , Just auditioned the AR integrated 75 into Sonus Faber Guanari Evolution sounded very good.
Wait, do you mean you actually listened to a tube amp recently??? You who wouldn't touch a tube amp with a 10 foot barge pole??? Incredible.
Yes the AR 75 integrated did sound very good with the Sonus Fabers , however I would never consider buying one. How did the Devialet 200 compare with the collection of exotic amps you auditioned today.
Err, Morri , whom do you speak such ill of , dont you have a class-D shootout to attend ..... ? :)
Edits: 12/22/14 12/22/14
I think you are missing the point....That's ok, you are not the only one...
try it! you know you want to!
They seem very happy- who are you to make such a judgment for others?
try it! you know you want to!
Edits: 12/22/14
I have yet to audition a Class D amplifier that I can live with and that includes Devialet D-Premier even if it is 1O% Class A. The CROWN amps are PA amps totally unsuitable for high end audio.
The Crown amps have high distortion. There are groups that swear the human ear cannot hear 1%. These are the same people who say all amps sound the same. They are too forward and bright to me. They do work good for subs as long as you are aware that they are engineered to kill response at 20hz down.
Not sure which Crown you are referring to, but the XLS amps' data sheet sites their power ratings at 0.5% THD.
http://www.crownaudio.com/media/wysiwyg/XLS/XLS-DC_datasheet.pdf
I get the impression that many folks commenting on these amps have not heard them. Good thing they are available from so many outlets with good return policies at a quite low price, so interested folks can hear for themselves in their systems. Always ideal.
Roscoe,
You're wrong Buddy, Morricab has heard every amp in the world , at least twice and he knows when there is just enuff Euphonics ... :)
Regards.
He'll be happy to tell you what is "best" and just what it is you should prefer. Follow the pied piper if you will, I prefer to make up my own mind based on my own preferences, not some know-it-all, heard-it-all wanna be...
try it! you know you want to!
Those are great amps. The connection options are very flexible. However, they designed to aggressively kill response below 20hz. This is supposed to keep shorting away from the output stage. That is the reason I went Carver+NHT active crossover to drive my setup.
"There are groups that swear the human ear cannot hear 1%. These are the same people who say all amps sound the same."
No, tube amp lovers are the ones to usually claim that humans can't hear 1% levels of distortion. Usually because most tube amps are prone to higher distortion. Some like that.
try it! you know you want to!
No, tube amp lovers are the ones to usually claim that humans can't hear 1% levels of distortion.
Once again, a gross misrepresentation of the facts.
What is normally said is that up to several % of 2nd order harmonic distortion has been found to be inaudible.
Likewise, if there are higher orders and they adhere in relative level at a given output level to the ears own, self-generated harmonics then those will also be inaudible.
If there is a deviation in the PATTERN, ie. higher order harmonics that are out of balance with lower harmonics or ones that should not be there at all then this will be AUDIBLE.
Now, can you in your own simpleton way begin to understand how complicated it really is and how false your simplistic statement is?
Humans can hear VERY low levels of distortion, IF it is high order or a pattern that doesn't match the ears own pattern for that listening level. Conversely, humans cannot hear quite high levels of distortion when it is only low order or fitting the correct pattern of harmonics for a given listening level.
Your reading comprehension is obviously as suspect as your logic. I didn't make the claim regarding tubes and distortion, I simply reported what others have said innumerable times. Plenty of people have posted here and other places to simply say less than 1% distortion is inaudible. Apparently you don't read much.
Complicated is it? You seem just fine characterizing an amp by topology. Or reducing something as complex as system interactions and individual preferences to a single scalar. Seems simple is something you are quite comfortable with when it fits your own prejudices.
try it! you know you want to!
I simply reported what others have said innumerable times.
So, you are a popinjay just repeating what "others" have said, which others? How many times before it is believed by you? Idiot. There are studies by Geddes, Cheever and several others that debunk this BS completely. Apparently it is you who don't read much.
You just want to quote a bunch of forum BS rather than actual research into the matter.
Wake up pointdexter, we are not curing cancer, we are talking about audio. No one needs to read any white papers or listen to your pseudoscience to come to any conclusions about what they like to listen to. If you have some deep psychological need to find validation from others, go for it.
All you citations and "science" is proved meaningless by the simple fact that there is no consensus about which amp is "best". There are likely as many people who prefer class d as those who prefer class a. You can ignore reality all you wish and spout your pseudoscience, hold your breath, and stomp your little feet all you wish. Who's the idiot?
try it! you know you want to!
"Wake up pointdexter, we are not curing cancer, we are talking about audio. No one needs to read any white papers or listen to your pseudoscience to come to any conclusions about what they like to listen to"
AH, so you refuse to even read the material...too difficult for you? Maybe you didn't make it out of high school? Sad...what a narrow minded idiot. Well, at least gain the real world experience and get a few good SET amps and suitable speakers. I have done just that with Class D, I gained real world, first hand experience. What are you arguing with?? Nothing from the real world...no surprise.
Trying to understand something is what science is all about...guess you wouldn't know anything about that though...
"All you citations and "science" is proved meaningless by the simple fact that there is no consensus about which amp is "best"."
Not true at all and there has been a distinct improvement in conventional amp designs probably at least indirectly as a result of the kind of studies I have linked to you.
Your pathetic personal attacks are the desperate words of an intellect that has run out of headroom....
I said "There is no consensus on which amp is "best" to which you replied, "not true at all"....Really? If there was a consensus, there wouldn't be 1000 amps on the market...Wow, you really are deluded...
try it! you know you want to!
No experience?? Thought so...
Another swing and miss...It's like watching a train wreck in real time.
try it! you know you want to!
Pointdexter is fitting ..... LOL
clueless is the most fitting for you.
Brilliant!
try it! you know you want to!
There needs to be quote button on this site so these confrontational posters can keep track of who they are bashing.
I never made an argument that humans cant hear 1%. If those comments are directed to me go over to AVS, find the official all amps sound the same thread, call out FMW and ArnyK and knock yourself out.
Morri,More Irony , lol , I mean , I could build a bridge with the content, i do understand you are not mere human like the rest of us and just because you say one topology is better than the other and you have documents to back this up (strawmen) and worst , taken off your list doesn't mean it's bad, no sir thats not what you are saying , afterall your 100 yrs of experience is backed up with 18K + hearing ...... :)
So,
Morri please post links showing AF1 has speed issues vs VPI , that 5 % thd at 10 watts is not audible due to its spectral content, as I'm of the impression such distortion is audible to some mortals Morri , it usually present itself as dead dynamics , a constant dead dulling of the sound , those sensitive to it tend to prefer the big dynamic jump of class -D or high powered A/Ab amplifiers and while i can admit I'm sensitive to Class-d high frequency issues. i can hear whats attractive about it , it sounds alive , complete opposite to the low powered high thd sound you are attracted to and yes i can also see whats attractive to those running FW type on very high sensitivity speakers , where most are operating in the 1-2 watt area , you see i understand there are no absolutes in audio , each has it's own compromises and I'm pleasantly suprised where class -D is going currently ...
So any class -D findings yet .... ? I think most here could predict your response ..:)
Regards
Edits: 12/26/14 12/26/14 12/26/14 12/26/14
THere is so much misinformation and misrepresentation in this post it is nearly impossible to disentangle it.
Using actual research to support ones ideas is not a strawman...you should try to understand the words you use before trying to use them.
I never stated that the AF1 has worse speed stability...it is not easy to get this data for TTs these days but it is not hard to suspect that it is. No one is talking about 10 watt 5% THD amps...these are your own strawmen.
As to the showdown...the Class D was ok, the winner it was not...that would go to the NAT and/or at lower volumes the Octaves but the Lamms were better than the Octaves at high volume. The Devialet just lacks something and all thought so. It is pretty inoffensive though.
Simple question, how loud do you listen? 1-2 watts is all most people use with maybe 10x that for peaks for reasonably sensitive speakers...nevermind high sensitivity ones.
Cab,More Dogma, no data, Did you level match? I cant stop laughing at the irony everytime you post, what a lunchbox , the Devialet cant drive the Thiels, obvious if you had any reading comprehension..
A tooby won, who would have thunk it .............. :)
Edits: 12/29/14 12/29/14 12/29/14
"So any class -D findings yet .... ? I think most here could predict your response ..:) "
based on all his previous generalizations and oversimplifications, no doubt class d will never suit him. Not enough color....
try it! you know you want to!
Says the guy with the clear agenda. I mean you have a picture of a Class D amp and you have the tag line "try it! you know you want it!" What are you? A Class D pimp?
What are you? A pseudoscience guru wannabe?
Notice I say "try it" rather than "don't try it".....I encourage people to find their own truths rather than pontificate and dictate.
try it! you know you want to!
I guess the ! and the "you know you want it!" don't mean a thing...LMAO. Your line is anything but an encouragement to find ones own way...what a tool...
Reading comprehension issues? "Try it, you know you want to!" is a suggestion. It makes no negative comments about any amp, amp topology, or amp design. It claims no superiority, makes no judgments, nor makes any pseudoscience claims. It is simply an inducement to experience something many have found worthy of a listen.
In fact, it is the antithesis of what you do....
try it! you know you want to!
Whatever you say...Pusher!
And the trifecta!
Trying to prove your ridiculous assertion that there is a "best" when it comes to subjective matters was a loser from the start.
try it! you know you want to!
Morri,
Give me me a few minutes to examine your response with an electron microscope, I'm sure after a 100 request there is some data in there somewhere ...
ROFL
Dont you just love the irony ...... Lol
Run over to AVS and listen to them yammer about all amps sounding the same. Blind fold tests. 1% distortion. $400 dollar AVR sounds as good as a krell.... etc. Gets old fast.
To each his own....It's just as bad reading the gospel of pseudo scientists who think they know what is "best" for everyone...
try it! you know you want to!
The most recent Stereophile had some info on the new NAD amps that use Ncore tech. They are supposed to be extremely good. Other sources have indicated they are the best measuring class d amps to date. I would like to hear them and compare to my NAD M25.
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2014/09/nad-masters-series-m22-hypex-ncore-for-the-rest-of-us/
Some info on the NAD ncore based amps.
You are entitled to your opinion but it hardly represents the truth for everyone, as the long list of happy class d users who have replaced class a and ab amps proves.
Many on audiocircle.com are very pleased with the crown amps which have replaced class a or class ab. Again, seems your generalization is false.
There are no absolutes other than the absolute idiocy of assuming your preference represents some universal truth.
try it! you know you want to!
Not every one has my listening experience , especially with Live v recorded sound.
Perhaps true. It is also true that not everyone has your tastes, preferences, or biases. What is true for you is just that, and that alone.
try it! you know you want to!
My taste is 95% Classical.
while my ratio of acoustical (be it classical or other genres) is not as high as yours, I think it is a safe bet to say those who like switching amps, especially "portable PA" amps like the Crown identifies itself listen predominantly to amplified music. After all, that's part of the sound to which they are accustomed!
You have hit the nail on the head. I have to revise my taste in music to approx. 90% Classical, I like a lot of movie music, plus Cole Porter, Gershwin etc. detest Rock noise & Pop
As for me, I enjoy listening to quite a few genres. There are other forms of acoustical music which also provide a good live reference. Having grown up in the 70s, I also listen to 60s-80s rock and pop. That includes some current Rihanna, Katy Perry and Yeah Yeah Yeahs.
I just don't use the latter for audio reference purposes. The heavily layered mult-tracked recordings tend to be flat in perspective and there really is no *live* reference. What exists via sound reinforcement crap sounds dreadful. :)
I'm Hopeless, i just like good music, regardless of genre ....
Regards
Agree , those poor peasants , listening to what they like instead of whats good for them ...
:)
Regards ..
ok.....
try it! you know you want to!
Please post your impressions...the Thiel CS3.7's are great platform and not the most easy speaker to drive...
Sounds like it is going to be a good time...
thanks
Mark
At least as far as you are concerned in the limited context in which you will be judging it.
try it! you know you want to!
not so limited...not exhaustive either...
Given the wide disparity in tastes and the near infinite variety in system configurations, it is extremely limited....but don't let that stop you...
try it! you know you want to!
Well for sure it wont stop us because of your opinion on the validity of the test. Given that the new Devialets are considered to be the best Class D yet, with the possible exception of the Ncore I guess we don't need to bring the rest, do we?
The truth is that I have heard the new Devialet 200 already on another system and was ok but still sounding dynamically flat. I have also heard the Ncore in the form of the Mola Mola with Lansche speakers at a show...it was good but nothing compared to Lansche speakers with a pair of Kronzilla amps...that a guy here in Switzerland has.
As for the other amps, well KR is usually just awesome sounding one of the best SETs out there, my NAT is a rather unique SE(T) beast and very good sounding...the Lamms have a near universally respected sound (even though I remain unimpressed) and the Octave monos represent one of the better push/pull pure tube amps. I might be bringing my JJ 322 Parallel 300B SET but it is probably in over its head with the Thiels.
The only thing we will not have represented is a push/pull triode amp and a big SS amp...no one owns one anymore!! All of my friends sold off their big bruiser Krells, Moon, McIntosh and Musical Fidelity amps.
THe preamp, BTW, is the Einstein "The Tube" MKII, one of the better upper end preamps. In addition to the big Transrotor TT, we will have a big Luxman DD TT.
Considered "best" by who? By what measure? In what system?Blah blah blah....more oversimplified generalizations...What a joke...
try it! you know you want to!
Edits: 12/21/14
The amount of negative feedback required to make it work at all is another reason to stay away...
Just to clarify one point, in the case of Class D amps based on TI Equibit, there is no feedback.
a couple of examples of amplifiers that utilize that TI chipset?
TacT
Lyngdorf
Peachtree decco 65
Kenwood and Panasonic receivers
It was originally developed by a couple of Danes who founded the company Toccata, possibly funded by Peter Lyngdorf. The first use I know of was in the TacT Millenium, in discrete circuits I believe (except for the DSP feeding it). TI acquired Toccata and developed it into integrated circuit form. They have a range of chip offerings now, some targeted for high quality audio applications i.e. Lyngdorf, others targeting HT receivers, car audio, and low power embedded uses.
They are far less common than ICEpower and Hypex for hi-fi. Part of the reason may be that they don't have any parts with super high power output to wow people with, no 400W or 700W stuff. Also, TI only sells you the set of chips you need (e.g. DSP, PWM stage, output stage) but leaves it up to you to design the board and provide the passive output filtration. Whereas ICEpower and Hypex will sell you drop-in modules.
You say these designs exhibit "no feedback", yet that assertion is not supported by what you read.
Lyngdorf on Lyngdorf
"This ensures a low natural distortion, and an unmatchable performance is achieved by using less feedback than other Class D amplifiers."
Using "less" feedback than extreme amounts found with other Class D designs is not the same as using none.
The SDA doesn't use Equibit. The Millennium and TDAI do. In TacT and Lyngdorf marketing speak, SDA means 'semi-digital' amplifier and TDAI means 'true digital' integrated amplifier. Millennium was their original flagship amp and they have stuck with the name.
Also, if you're Googling, TI has mostly switched to using "PurePath Digital" in lieu of "Equibit" as their trademark of choice. Both are referring to the same architecture.
Bruno Putzneys has a very different take on the future of class D designs whether they are pure digital or analog supplemented. Naturally, his opinion is subject to bias, but...
His summary
Perhaps the output impedance issue is why Equibit never went anywhere.
To some degree, he is just stating the obvious. Without feedback, damping factor is low and the output stage has to be inherently very linear for low THD, which usually requires careful circuit design and component selection, and thus isn't cheap. Whereas the use of feedback allows one to build an amplifier with high damping factor and very low THD cheaply. But that is true of Class A and Class A/B as well.
Also, at least one new design has come along since he wrote that which may defy his categorisation: NAD direct digital.
I haven't heard the NAD, nor have I heard anything using Putzey's Hypex modules, and for that matter I haven't heard anything recent with ICEpower or Lyngdorf's latest generation. So I can't say much about which approach is leading from a sound quality perspective. I'm quite happy with my Ayre for now.
NT
try it! you know you want to!
There is no rationale reason to stay away from class d. The fact is, many people like them and have replaced well known class a amps with them. Everyone shopping for an amp should try several and decide for themselves.
try it! you know you want to!
Been there done that got the T-shirt...anything else to add?
Ah yes, I forgot to mention the Devialet reviews. John Atkinson (editor of Stereophile) "best amp ever" when he reviewed it....
.
Edits: 12/18/14 12/18/14
John Atkins is old. He cant hear very well......shhhhhhhh
Same when younger J.A.
Edits: 12/22/14
Subjectively forget what John Atkinson says.
From this review the text "best amp ever" is not to be found. To which review do you refer?
What we do find is a horrible square wave (no surprise there) and a generic conclusion that clearly qualifies itself:
"But when you consider that in my system it replaced a combination of a D/A preamp and similarly rated power amplifier costing a smidgen short of $29,000 without cables, and in some ways sounded better, that price starts to look more competitive. "
What about this part:
"Devialet's D-Premier amplifier is the most extraordinary product I have reviewed for Stereophile. Superb sound quality, future-proof design, everything you need in one box—it is the epitome of what a high-end audio product should be. Wow!"
He didn't say "best amp ever" but it was probably the most rave review I've seen Atkinson write.
JA can be much more explicit when he finds better...
"All of the first-order sonic attributes—frequency balance, linearity, lack of coloration, etc.—are beyond reproach, which means one needs to focus on such higher-order qualities as the presentation of the soundstage and the accuracy of the imaging, neither of which can be measured. But with Ayre's KX-R Twenty, I had no difficulty reaching a conclusion: While $27,500 is a high price to pay for a line preamplifier, the KX-R Twenty is as good as a preamplifier can get. "
That was from the Ayre KX-R Twenty review.
There's no need to pussyfoot about "competitive pricing" or the component being "almost better" than something else.
...everything you need in one box
Who cares about stuffing everything in one box at that price point?
I have no doubt that JA would prefer a KX-R Twenty + MX-R Twenty + DAC of choice over the Devialet. I know I would.
Who cares about stuffing everything in one box at that price point?
I'm guessing it's mostly people who, for various reasons, want a simpler system without sacrificing high end performance. And people who are into modern minimalist design. It's so those people can have their cake and eat it too. There are some people who go for it based on sound alone, but I suspect it's more typically a combination of sound, looks, and convenience.
I have no doubt that JA would prefer a KX-R Twenty + MX-R Twenty + DAC of choice over the Devialet. I know I would.
Nor do I. There's no need to foment BS about what someone has actually said with gear at the level of the Ayre stuff.
I'm guessing it's mostly people who, for various reasons, want a simpler system without sacrificing high end performance.
Simpler system? Are there folks who are challenged to expend a half hour (once) to hook up a source--> preamp--> power amp? I've been doing that since I was 16. Evidently, they most certainly don't have an HT system which always requires far more complexity.
Sorry, I must be missing something. :)
Simpler system? Are there folks who are challenged to expend a half hour (once) to hook up a source--> preamp--> power amp? I've been doing that since I was 16. Evidently, they most certainly don't have an HT system which always requires far more complexity.
Sorry, I must be missing something. :)
Lots of different reasons. Some people want to save space because they have a small apartment or condo in a desirable neighborhood in the city. Some people just like to live leaner with a smaller footprint of stuff to 'tie them down'. Some are going through a 'purging' stage in life. And I think some people suffer a constant temptation to change & tweak stuff in their system and eliminating components reduces that.
I can empathize. After living overseas for a few years and then returning to my typical suburban US home, the first thing I wanted to do was get rid of all that 'stuff' that I had happily lived without. Among other things, I upgraded my main system and it shrunk from 8 items on the rack to 2. I got more satisfaction from selling and giving away the audio gear I had accumulated than acquiring it in the first place. Unlike many audiophiles, I have never been interested in collecting anything. Different strokes I guess.
I'm not a "collector" of components either nor have stacks of redundant components like an audio dealer. :)For a given footprint, however, I find little difference between two components on a rack vs. four. My rooms have eight foot ceilings.
Returning to the original assertion, however, I seriously doubt that the majority of audiophiles find some pressing need to buy an all-in-one product.
Edits: 12/19/14
..Atkinson wrote magnificent "twice" to indicate how great this amp was. "The most extraordinary product" - in 26 years, since he joined Stereophile.Other Stereophile writers have used PS Audio and Bel Canto switchers (as their reference) starting back in 2005.
...oooh how I love ignorance...
Edits: 12/18/14
I owned the PS Audio Class D amp for a short time...horrible sounding piece of trash.
Paul thought so , so no more CLass-D .....
And yet you bought it...?
try it! you know you want to!
Got it as a partial trade for something else without hearing it, figuring I could resell it to someone with hearing damage without problem if it sucked...it did and it was relatively easy to move so I did. It was pretty good as a subwoofer amp but that was about it.
.
No cogging is like saying no feedack, all relative ......... :)
.
Ya - you're missing a lot...
Do you lack having a couple of square feet in your listening space to support separate components? Sorry to hear that!
I forgot to mention the Devialet reviews. John Atkinson (editor of Stereophile) "best amp ever" when he reviewed it...
It's really sad when you feel you must make boldface lies to support your argument.
Do you have a grasp on reality?
but it is always fun to see the same naysayers pop up in every class d thread denying reality and continuing to repeat their same tired and trite pronouncements about what's "best".
try it! you know you want to!
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: