My NAD 3020 D proves your Class D tropes are wrong


I have a desktop integrated, the NAD 3020D which I use with custom near field monitors. It is being fed by Roon via a Squeezebox Touch and coaxial digital.

It is 5 years old and it sounds great. None of the standard myths of bad Class D sound exist here. It may lack the tube like liquid midrange of my Luxman, or the warmth of my prior Parasound but no one in this forum could hear it and go "aha, Class D!!" by itself, except maybe by the absolute lack of noise even when 3’ away from the speakers.

I’m not going to argue that this is the greatest amp ever, or that it is even a standout desktop integrated. All I am saying is that the stories about how bad Class D is compared to linear amps have been outdated for ages.

Great to see new development with GaN based Class D amps, great to see Technics using DSP feed-forward designs to overcome minor limitations in impedance matching and Atmasphere’s work on reducing measurable distortion as well but OMG stop with the "Class D was awful until just now" threads as it ignores about 30 years of steady research and innovation.
erik_squires
I have NAD 3030 on my patio/pavilion out by the pool. A/B Simaudio 340i in my main listening room and a pathos Classic One mk II in my office. Love them all and each has different qualities.

open you third eye.
I live in the Caribbean and my main, bedroom and desktop systems are all class D.  Only my two Marantz AVRs are class AB.  I've never ventured into class A because it's simply too hot here. Air Conditioning is expensive, thanks to the exorbitant power costs.  As class D tech evolves I keep upgrading. I'm anxiously waiting on my latest; a Purifi amp that will replace a PeachTree IcePower based integrated.  
I have auditioned an NAD c298 which uses purifi tech. I had this powering a set of martin logan 60xti. I was using my naim uniti atom as a preamp. They sounded really really good. I tried doing side by side comparisons with the naim uniti itself powering the speakers. This isn't a fair comparison as the atom is only 40 wpc. However, playing both at high (Not ear splitting) levels I was able to detect a subtle difference. I could be biased as I do love the naim sound. However, I found the NAD to be a bit too clinical in its presentation compared to the naim which was more lively and easy to listen to although not overly warm. The NAD was VERY clean but almost to a fault. I did use TIDAL. I do think class D is the future whereas class A and AB have kind of hit a wall as far as growth and expansion. Class D still has room to grow.