Thoughts on class D ampliers?

tuga

. . .
Wammer
Aug 17, 2007
14,342
7,001
173
Oxen's ford, UK
AKA
Ricardo
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
One of the interesting things about this amplifier is it is a GaN switching amplifier with a higher switching frequency than the silicon based Class D amplifiers. Some complained that having a lower switching frequency amp could cause phase shift issues with the filters used. The promise was a switching frequency of MHz but it seems to be nearer to 400KHz is what is now appearing. I am not sure how Technics define the output power of the amp, some use 0.5%THD, others 0.1% THD and others 1% THD. Not seen too many measurements from independent sources yet.

Only thing to do is listen to it and tell us what you hear.
If I'm not mistaken most amps will shift fase anyway at 20kHz, unless they have a very wide bandwidth (e.g. Spectral).
 

Shadders

Well-Known Wammer
Wammer
Aug 11, 2018
1,366
937
148
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
One of the interesting things about this amplifier is it is a GaN switching amplifier with a higher switching frequency than the silicon based Class D amplifiers. Some complained that having a lower switching frequency amp could cause phase shift issues with the filters used. The promise was a switching frequency of MHz but it seems to be nearer to 400KHz is what is now appearing. I am not sure how Technics define the output power of the amp, some use 0.5%THD, others 0.1% THD and others 1% THD. Not seen too many measurements from independent sources yet.

Only thing to do is listen to it and tell us what you hear.
Hi,
In reading the Technics page for the amplifier, the GaN devices are in the paragraph that deals with the power supply, where it is an SMPS with an increased clock rate from 100kHz to 400kHz.

Since the amplifier is pure digital, then GaN devices on the output stage would not offer much benefit except for efficiency. The limitation of an all digital amplifier is the clock rate required for the quantisation of the switching time. For example, if a 10bit counter is used for the switching time position of the PWM signal which has a 500kHz pulse width clock, then you will need 512MHz clock (10bit == 1024 count limit, 1024 x 500kHz = 512MHz).

GaN devices can be used for reducing the THD, but this reduction is minimal, where they mainly benefit the efficiency of the output stage. Chip amplifiers will benefit greatly here. Current silicon based chip class D amplifiers such as the Texas Instrument TPA3255 provide 150watts into 8ohms with a small heatsink.

Most designs i have seen from manufacturers use a switching frequency of 400kHz+.

The Hypex and Purifi achieve very low THD's with silicon based output transistors, primarily due to their increased feedback within the design.

Regards,
Shadders.
 

George 47

Subjectivist
Staff member
Jan 1, 2006
8,423
6,070
193
United Kingdom
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
We seem to be getting a bit of confusion here. My point is that GaN allows a higher switching frequency for the PWM. This switching frequency needs to be removed and that requires a steep filter. Now if the switching filter is very steep then it could have an impact on the phase of the top end of audio. However, if what you want to remove is at a much higher frequency then its impact on the audio is reduced.

On THD, noise and efficiency, GaN is claimed to be much better than silicon and that is why it is taking over. As you like technical articles this clip explains why: with data.

But why the focus on THD, it is now so low can it be heard? It has become number chasing for no real purpose. Even the higher harmonics are incredibly low. But still there is a huge focus on THD. Some people do not like the Class D sound so maybe we need to look at other changes to the signal, or is that what you mean by distortion, anything that could be altering the signal?

Despite all that academic stuff what really matters is how the OP is getting on with the new Technics? Did he like the sound, is he tempted by what it does and will the dreaded moment come when the wallet opens?

It is all about music and its communication with people. If it does not then is it any use apart from being a thing to measure?

Enjoy your music.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Non-Smoking Man

Shadders

Well-Known Wammer
Wammer
Aug 11, 2018
1,366
937
148
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
We seem to be getting a bit of confusion here. My point is that GaN allows a higher switching frequency for the PWM. This switching frequency needs to be removed and that requires a steep filter. Now if the switching filter is very steep then it could have an impact on the phase of the top end of audio.
Hi,
Even when the switching frequency is 500kHz, it is still 25x higher than 20kHz. Most class D amplifiers have an output filter cut off in the region of 50kHz+. The phase lag at 20kHz is approximately 20deg, and at 10kHz it is 10deg lagging.

The filter is a simple LC filter - second order. All class AB amplifiers have them too - although the cut off frequency is a lot higher, and they are second order.

On THD, noise and efficiency, GaN is claimed to be much better than silicon and that is why it is taking over. As you like technical articles this clip explains why:
I viewed some of the video - the claim seems to be open loop performance of GaN is just as good as closed loop performance for silicon. So, the gains do not exceed silicon.

The feedback of the Purifi and latest Hypex presents a closed loop output impedance of 1mohm and below, hence low RDS-on is not an issue.

There is no reason to move to GaN for the output stage unless there are much higher powers involved and the need to increase efficiency. Purifi and Hypex have achieved exemplary performance from silicon, and GaN adds nothing in regards to the audio band performance.

Regards,
Shadders.
 

AndyCC72

Wammer
Wammer
Mar 4, 2021
556
1,177
113
52
Bexley, Kent
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I had the TDAI 3400 on loan amongst the dozen amps of all classes I was trialing with my Avantgarde speakers. I found it's sound OK, but not special, but dire when RoomPerfect was engaged. Life was sucked from the music, so the Lyngdorf was quickly elimiated. Pity as it's great on paper, but no comparison with the NAD M33.
That’s the exact opposite of my experience. Just further illustrates the fact that audio is very subjective.

I’ve read on forums recently that a few people have trialled the NAD C399 and found it cold, clinical and lacking in any emotion and have returned it. Is the M33 hugely different from the C399 sound signature wise?

Room Perfect works wonders in my listening room which is at the end of my garden, it has plaster board inner walls and a suspended floor. Its 4.3m x 3.8m. It’s well Furnished and all sources and speakers are isolated. I spent months fiddling with speaker positioning etc and am now in a place where I’m happy with the sound.

You do love to bash the Lyngdorf and RP and do so on many forums and given every opportunity😅 but at least you’ve tried/listened to it. Many ‘definitive’ opinions on forums are pure theory offered by people who haven’t listen to the kit they’re discussing.
 

hearhere

Wammer
Wammer
Apr 9, 2013
1,373
1,185
158
Portsmouth, UK
AKA
Peter
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
That’s the exact opposite of my experience. Just further illustrates the fact that audio is very subjective.

I’ve read on forums recently that a few people have trialled the NAD C399 and found it cold, clinical and lacking in any emotion and have returned it. Is the M33 hugely different from the C399 sound signature wise?

Room Perfect works wonders in my listening room which is at the end of my garden, it has plaster board inner walls and a suspended floor. Its 4.3m x 3.8m. It’s well Furnished and all sources and speakers are isolated. I spent months fiddling with speaker positioning etc and am now in a place where I’m happy with the sound.

You do love to bash the Lyngdorf and RP and do so on many forums and given every opportunity😅 but at least you’ve tried/listened to it. Many ‘definitive’ opinions on forums are pure theory offered by people who haven’t listen to the kit they’re discussing.
Hi Andy – I think we all have our own prejudices in favour of the equipment we’ve spent our hard-earned cash on buying, but when it comes to buying replacement kit, we should do plenty of open-minded research and to home trial several examples from a short list.

I’d been using valve SETs to power my horn speakers since soon after buying them in 2002. I decided to move to ss for a number of reasons, not least because I had concluded I’d listen to far more music without concerns about valve life, power consumption, etc. On reflection this has proved correct and I have no desire to return to valves.

After asking opinions on forums, visiting shows and online research, I drew up a short list of amps to try out in my system. This list was added to over time and overall I home tested a dozen amps that I thought may offer the sound I was looking for. Although the Lyngdorf was not on my initial list, several favourable mentions were made of it (mostly on AV Forums) so I borrowed the 3400 as its price and spec was in line with my plans.

I’d be happy to send you by PM my list of amps tested with one-line comments on their performance or suitability. As I mentioned earlier, I found the Lyngdorf very good on paper and pretty good sounding, but its front panel display was poor (comparable to a dot-matrix printer when put against a high res full colour LED screen on some of its rivals) and RoomPerfect sucked so much life from the music it condemned the Lyngdorf as far as I was concerned.

My comments here and on other forums about the Lyngdorf are always prompted by a reference to this brand from others where as often or not, opinions are invited. I’ve only ever stated my own rather limited experience and my reasons for rejecting this unit. Others may well have differing opinions, though I always suggest that anyone thinking of purchasing a Lyngdorf (or for that matter any other amp within the price brackets) should do themselves a favour and try other amps at home to compare it with. As I eventually chose a NAD Master Series amp, I suggest others looking for a good amp to include a NAD M series amp in their auditioning plans.

You mention the C399. I have no experience of that unit, but it comes within NAD’s C range that is not a match for their top line M range – it’s about half the price, so you wouldn’t expect it to. It doesn’t use Purifi Eigentakt technology, so clearly not comparable. The M33 certainly can’t be described as “cold, clinical and lacking in any emotion”, far from it. For a unit to be awarded Stereophile’s 2020 Amp of the Year, Component of the Year and joint Editor’s Choice, the M33 surely should be considered a worthwhile product and probably superior to its rivals.

I hope this explains why I contribute to conversations where I see Lyngdorf mentioned. I have nothing against the brand (it sounded far better than some others I tried), but I found it much better without its built-in room correction - as I’ve also found to a lesser extent with the room correction DSPs built into other amps I tried – NAD and Micromega. I’ve tried to explain why I believe all these processor do no favours to the excitement factor of reproduced music, despite flattening out the bass where room acoustics may cause difficulties. I also believe that other means should normally achieve good results without DSP, although those who choose speakers that need sub-woofer support make life much more difficult for themselves. A good floor-stander with large(ish) bass drivers should be easier to set up properly without resort to RC processors. It could be that in your garden room with 4 speakers needing to be set up, a DSP is the obvious solution.

Peter
 
Last edited:

George 47

Subjectivist
Staff member
Jan 1, 2006
8,423
6,070
193
United Kingdom
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Hi,
Even when the switching frequency is 500kHz, it is still 25x higher than 20kHz. Most class D amplifiers have an output filter cut off in the region of 50kHz+. The phase lag at 20kHz is approximately 20deg, and at 10kHz it is 10deg lagging.

The filter is a simple LC filter - second order. All class AB amplifiers have them too - although the cut off frequency is a lot higher, and they are second order.

Good,,,and is such a phase lag audible......Your comment on filters just confuses issues.

I viewed some of the video - the claim seems to be open loop performance of GaN is just as good as closed loop performance for silicon. So, the gains do not exceed silicon.

The feedback of the Purifi and latest Hypex presents a closed loop output impedance of 1mohm and below, hence low RDS-on is not an issue.

There is no reason to move to GaN for the output stage unless there are much higher powers involved and the need to increase efficiency. Purifi and Hypex have achieved exemplary performance from silicon, and GaN adds nothing in regards to the audio band performance.
In the video, the manufacturer is saying that GaN not only increases efficiency but it also increases audio performance by lowering the THD and noise. Do you have any evidence that this is not true?

Anyway, this must be boring to others. GaN claims to lower THD, but does it sound any better?
 

Shadders

Well-Known Wammer
Wammer
Aug 11, 2018
1,366
937
148
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Good,,,and is such a phase lag audible......Your comment on filters just confuses issues.
Hi,
You claimed that class D has a steep filter that could cause issues - class AB has a second order filter the same as class D.
My point is that GaN allows a higher switching frequency for the PWM. This switching frequency needs to be removed and that requires a steep filter. Now if the switching filter is very steep then it could have an impact on the phase of the top end of audio. However, if what you want to remove is at a much higher frequency then its impact on the audio is reduced.
In the video, the manufacturer is saying that GaN not only increases efficiency but it also increases audio performance by lowering the THD and noise. Do you have any evidence that this is not true?
GaN is a red herring. It is just an output device. Hypex latest offering and Purifi have such low THD with silicon mosfets, such that GaN is not required at all. Silicon mosfets are more than capable - example :

Infineon IGO60R070D1 GaN Mosfet has switch on rise time 9ns and swtich off fall time 13ns. (latest GaN)
Infineon IRFI4020H Silicon Mosfet has a switch on rise time 8ns and swtich off fall time 4ns. (very old silicon mosfet circa 2006)

Where GaN excels is higher voltage tolerance, lower gate charge to turn on, and faster reverse recovery time.

The manufacturers claims are based on...... what exactly ? Which amplifiers were they comparing their system to ? There is the problem - the "other" system could be a very poor implementation of class D.

Regards,
Shadders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Music At Home

George 47

Subjectivist
Staff member
Jan 1, 2006
8,423
6,070
193
United Kingdom
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Oh dear.....nevermind......You are totally focused on THD which is claimed to be improved by GaN. I am not fussed about a measurement so small it makes little difference. Did you see the shapes of square waves for both? Very Poor Implementation????? You exaggerate a misunderstanding. Anyway enough....let's see what people hear as it is what the amplifier is designed for not pointless measurements and misunderstandings.
 

Shadders

Well-Known Wammer
Wammer
Aug 11, 2018
1,366
937
148
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Oh dear.....nevermind......You are totally focused on THD which is claimed to be improved by GaN.
Hi,
The key word you used is "claimed".
Did you see the shapes of square waves for both? Very Poor Implementation????? You exaggerate a misunderstanding
No, i provided rise and fall times for a silicon mosfet and GaN mosfet. The silicon mosfet is 16 years old, and has slightly better rise time, and much better fall time. The graph in the video shows the steeper rise time for the GaN mosfet, but you do not know what driver circuit they are using.

Class D in band performance is heavily based on the feedback used. Old silicon mosfet technology is more than adequate using such techniques.

Regards,
Shadders.
 

George 47

Subjectivist
Staff member
Jan 1, 2006
8,423
6,070
193
United Kingdom
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Hi,
The key word you used is "claimed".

No, i provided rise and fall times for a silicon mosfet and GaN mosfet. The silicon mosfet is 16 years old, and has slightly better rise time, and much better fall time. The graph in the video shows the steeper rise time for the GaN mosfet, but you do not know what driver circuit they are using.

Class D in band performance is heavily based on the feedback used. Old silicon mosfet technology is more than adequate using such techniques.

Regards,
Shadders.
Probably why I used the word claimed......

And as GaN does not need the extra circuitry for closed loop operation might be why it performs better. Anyway we shall see when someone we trust more measures/listens to them.
 

Shadders

Well-Known Wammer
Wammer
Aug 11, 2018
1,366
937
148
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
And as GaN does not need the extra circuitry for closed loop operation might be why it performs better.
Hi,
Nope. It is difficult to determine from their pictures the design, in that they may use the DSP for open loop performance. This is 0.2% THD across the frequency range. Not very good.
Their design is here :
https://gansystems.com/wp-content/u...UD-BUNDLE2-GS_Technical-Manual_Rev-211125.pdf
Their system THD for closed loop is no better than the Texas Instruments TPA3255 (Silicon Mosfet) IC solution with Post Filter Feedback (PFFB - https://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/slaa788)

If you examine the 10watt output into 4ohms for the TPA3255 with PFFB (page 45, figure 89) it exceeds the GaN Systems design 30watts into 8ohms (page 13, figure 5.2) that has closed loop design. The TI3255 with PFFB is slightly worse at 50watts into 4ohms.

Your claim of no extra circuitry is really unfounded. Examine the evaluation board for the GaN system page 9 figure 2.3, and minimal components is not correct. Examine the Texas Instrument evaluation board (https://www.ti.com/tool/TPA3255EVM) and there is much less components for the same performance.

Do the same for Hypex or Purifi given that their performance is at least 10x of GaN design.

GaN transistors may improve efficiency, and provide greater output powers, but to achieve the performance of Hypex or Purifi, then closed loop designs are critical, and silicon output devices more than meet the requirements.

Regards,
Shadders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tuga

Radioham

Wammer
Wammer
Mar 8, 2010
1,911
344
163
Peterborough.
AKA
Alan Ralph
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Yawn....OK. No more. 🥳
As the OP here is a brief report of my loan of the Technics Amplifier and CD Player/Streamer.
The amplifier is impressive both in sound and range of inputs. The price is also very good. However I find the power meters are pretty useless when using sensitive speakers as I only need a few watts to my Tannoy's and as you would expect the meters hardly move. Its a pity there is not a menu to change the sensitivity. The LAPC calibration had very little effect on my system. I found the volume control to be very analogue in operation.

The CD Player/Streamer is not very good from an operational perspective. The CD controls are slow to respond. The streaming service does not support Qubuz at the present time. To use streaming you first have to load Goggle Home followed by Technics own app. To get the best from the CD Player/Streamer you have to use both the remote control handset and i-pad. Given the amount of space on the front panel its a pity the display is not larger and the controls spaced out more.

So I will be sticking with my Marantz PM12-SE and have the CD player/ DAC SA12 SE on back order from 30th April.

Alan
 

Miller-8

Wammer
Wammer
Aug 6, 2005
2,798
182
93
Midlothian, UK
AKA
Michael
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
What is the reference?
”lean” & “forward” depends on what the listener is used to, also the speakers and the room.
I just don’t trust reviews.
I trust some reviewers quite a bit. In this case I think he was spot on.
 

ROOG

Newbie
Wammer
Dec 12, 2020
121
127
48
I recently purchased the SMSL DA-9 after watching this review on YouTube:



Thread on audio science review: https://www.******************.com/forum/index.php?threads/smsl-da9-wait-and-see-or-solid-buy.21927/

This amp circuitry was designed by Shenzhen Audio.

I have to say so far my experience with the amp has been very similar to how the reviewer describes it. Bass sounds nicely textured and punchy, treble extended and detailed, midrange also detailed but slightly lean and a touch forward.

This seems to be a common description with class D amplification. Can anyone explain what causes it?

Early class D implementations were hampered by the technology and understanding of the day, I recall seeing class D HiFi amps advertised in the late 70's by Sony. I haven't heard one of these but I believe it was not universally liked. This image has stuck and is rattled out each time class D is mentioned often before anyone has had a chance to listen, they already think they know what its going to sound like.

Work carried out by the likes of Putzeys and others and the choice of using more suited to the task transistors has moved things on a lot. Certainly my experiences with Ncore and Purifi class D amps is that i would not have known they were class D if I had not seen the equipment. Old stereotypes are hard to shake off in a world that fauns over, nostalgic kit. ("Nostalgic Kit, I love that woman", its a play on old Goons Joke! involving 'Tropical Kit' as in military uniform suitable for use in hot climates)

I'll get my coat.
 

Non-Smoking Man

Wammer
Wammer
Mar 31, 2009
6,482
2,522
158
Chichester W. Sussx.
AKA
Jack lambert
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Hi Andy – I think we all have our own prejudices in favour of the equipment we’ve spent our hard-earned cash on buying, but when it comes to buying replacement kit, we should do plenty of open-minded research and to home trial several examples from a short list.

I’d been using valve SETs to power my horn speakers since soon after buying them in 2002. I decided to move to ss for a number of reasons, not least because I had concluded I’d listen to far more music without concerns about valve life, power consumption, etc. On reflection this has proved correct and I have no desire to return to valves.

After asking opinions on forums, visiting shows and online research, I drew up a short list of amps to try out in my system. This list was added to over time and overall I home tested a dozen amps that I thought may offer the sound I was looking for. Although the Lyngdorf was not on my initial list, several favourable mentions were made of it (mostly on AV Forums) so I borrowed the 3400 as its price and spec was in line with my plans.

I’d be happy to send you by PM my list of amps tested with one-line comments on their performance or suitability. As I mentioned earlier, I found the Lyngdorf very good on paper and pretty good sounding, but its front panel display was poor (comparable to a dot-matrix printer when put against a high res full colour LED screen on some of its rivals) and RoomPerfect sucked so much life from the music it condemned the Lyngdorf as far as I was concerned.

My comments here and on other forums about the Lyngdorf are always prompted by a reference to this brand from others where as often or not, opinions are invited. I’ve only ever stated my own rather limited experience and my reasons for rejecting this unit. Others may well have differing opinions, though I always suggest that anyone thinking of purchasing a Lyngdorf (or for that matter any other amp within the price brackets) should do themselves a favour and try other amps at home to compare it with. As I eventually chose a NAD Master Series amp, I suggest others looking for a good amp to include a NAD M series amp in their auditioning plans.

You mention the C399. I have no experience of that unit, but it comes within NAD’s C range that is not a match for their top line M range – it’s about half the price, so you wouldn’t expect it to. It doesn’t use Purifi Eigentakt technology, so clearly not comparable. The M33 certainly can’t be described as “cold, clinical and lacking in any emotion”, far from it. For a unit to be awarded Stereophile’s 2020 Amp of the Year, Component of the Year and joint Editor’s Choice, the M33 surely should be considered a worthwhile product and probably superior to its rivals.

I hope this explains why I contribute to conversations where I see Lyngdorf mentioned. I have nothing against the brand (it sounded far better than some others I tried), but I found it much better without its built-in room correction - as I’ve also found to a lesser extent with the room correction DSPs built into other amps I tried – NAD and Micromega. I’ve tried to explain why I believe all these processor do no favours to the excitement factor of reproduced music, despite flattening out the bass where room acoustics may cause difficulties. I also believe that other means should normally achieve good results without DSP, although those who choose speakers that need sub-woofer support make life much more difficult for themselves. A good floor-stander with large(ish) bass drivers should be easier to set up properly without resort to RC processors. It could be that in your garden room with 4 speakers needing to be set up, a DSP is the obvious solution.

Peter
Reading your posts closely Peter, I note that you didn't reject SET valve amps (for the mids and tops of your Avantgarde Duos) on grounds of sound quality but rather 'valve life, power consumption etc.' (Para 2).

Having recently been over to hear my horns which have valve amps in the midrange and tops, including 2 SET amps, I'm intrigued as to whether SQ is to be included in the 'etc'..? (Bearing in mind that the horn/valve emigrees now resident in the 'other place' (AA) favour such amps in certain appropriate places (such as the mids and tops)). Its really quite a departure for a horn man to be touting class D as you are. . though feasable re bass drivers)

Jack NSM
 

hearhere

Wammer
Wammer
Apr 9, 2013
1,373
1,185
158
Portsmouth, UK
AKA
Peter
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Reading your posts closely Peter, I note that you didn't reject SET valve amps (for the mids and tops of your Avantgarde Duos) on grounds of sound quality but rather 'valve life, power consumption etc.' (Para 2).

Having recently been over to hear my horns which have valve amps in the midrange and tops, including 2 SET amps, I'm intrigued as to whether SQ is to be included in the 'etc'..? (Bearing in mind that the horn/valve emigrees now resident in the 'other place' (AA) favour such amps in certain appropriate places (such as the mids and tops)). Its really quite a departure for a horn man to be touting class D as you are. . though feasable re bass drivers)

Jack NSM
Hi Jack - You're right, I used and was very happy with SETs for 17 years after buying my first horn speakers - Avantgarde Unos. The general consensus on various forums advocated this match and I went along with it, although looking at the systems that owners of AGs posted on the AG site showed at least as many ss systems as valve ones. Certainly the sound from my new speakers was fantastic and lifelike after an earlier disappointing ATC 50 purchase. As the ATCs were active, I had no good quality ss amp at the time, so I had a series of SETs, plus an OTL from Graaf.

My move to ss has been described on this forum before and I'm surprised you've missed it. However here we go again!

3 years ago I realised that my daily listening time was sub-consciously limited because I was using valve amps. I asked on forums for suggestions of ss amps that may match or better the sound quality in terms of entertainment / goose-bump factor, not necessarily with a copycat SET sound.

A short list of amps was eventually drawn up of various Classes and I bought or borrowed a dozen amps to home demo. I was fully expecting one of the Class A amps to win out as these are (along with valves) often associated with horns. However the Class A amps I tried disappointed, though the Accuphase A-36 was a great amp and I kept it for a couple of years.

I really don't care the technology used in my amp (or any other component for that matter) as long as it delights and entertains. As it happened, one of the Class D amps (NAD's "Direct Digital" M32) impressed me more than any of the As or ABs, so I bought a used one. This was upgraded to the even better M33 when it was released in late 2020. Most of the other amps were more costly than the NAD and offered fewer useful features, so I was (and still am), very content with the Purifi-based NAD.

Will I move to something better? Yes probably. I'm looking for a replacement of the all-in-one, but I fear it will be a £12K'ish 2-box solution, so I'm spinning out my research as long as I can! Will the new amp be Class D? Only if it equals or exceeds the best of the rest. Will it be valve? In a word - no!

I first ventured into Class D 15 or so years ago after buying a cheap Tripath board, powered by a 12V battery and later I bought the Red Wine Signature 30 amplifier that was well reviewed at the time. Neither sounded good, so I stayed with the SETs until I started my search for a good ss amp.

I like to keep my audio life simple and that's (I'm sure you'll agree) a long way from your approach! We both have great systems and I think we are both very content with what we have. Vive la difference! Peter
 
  • Like
Reactions: George 47

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,444
Messages
2,451,263
Members
70,783
Latest member
reg66

Latest Articles