2. amps-preamps
  3. 126837-80492

Class D Technology

So I get the obvious strengths of Class D. Efficiency, power output & running cool which allows for small form factors. I also understand the weaknesses somewhat. 1. Non-linear & lots of distortion that needs to be cleaned up with an output filter. 
So my question is, if it weren't for efficiency & power, would there be any reason to own a Class D amp? Do they beat Class A in any other categories that count for sound quality?  
seanheis1
charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,250 posts
 
Hi Guido,
Regarding the notion of dismissing a class based on selected specifications I’m with you 100%, dogma doesn’t work for me. It has to be based on actual listening experiences. I also agree with you in that within any audio product genre inevitably a hierarchy is established, class D amplifiers included. I’m very fond of SET amplification but readily admit there’s a definite spectrum of quality and performance.

I without reservation respect the listening impressions that you and others here have posted pertaining to class D amplifiers, who am I to say that you all are wrong? My point is that by the same token those who’ve listen to these amplifiers and rejected them on sonic/musical grounds have simply expressed themselves openly. I’ll make it a point to hear a Jeff Rowland class D amp based on your genuine enthusiasm. It could certainly be better than the Mola Mola amplifier I’ve heard a couple of times.
Charles
Post removed 
danvignau's avatar
danvignau
935 posts
 
GDHAL: The 1600 watts is peak rms power, not continuous. Plus, with  computer regulated power supplies, my 3 amplifiers, each rated at 1500 watts input, can all fill at once at turn on, on a 30 amp circuit. That is 4500 actual watts divided by 120 volts = 37.5 amps, but only if I had totally unregulated power supplies.
danvignau's avatar
danvignau
935 posts
 

Consider CD's. In the early days, about all audiophiles who did not sell CD players said they were inferior, and they were. Great strides have been made, and there are truly excellent players now. I have never met a person who had tens of thousands of dollars invested in TT's and LP's, and who claimed That records sound better, who had a comparably priced CD player to compare to his beloved pieces of plastic with a needle scratching the surface to make sound, from century old technology. Class D will ultimately evolve and improve. Personally, I haven't heard it yet, but that does not mean it does not exist.


guidocorona
4,298 posts
 

Fascinating... Looks like my last post has dematerialized. I was not aware that what I write is so controversial. Oh well...


To Charles, Mola Mola is a very fine amp, but it might not constitute the "last word" in the application of NCore technology to an amp. In the current Rowland lineup, for example, I have found some amps that I prefer over Mola Mola, and at least one that I like less. E.g. My M925 monos and the M825 stereo are in the top range of my preferred amps, together with Solution and ARC reference amplifiers. Yes, I do prefer them to Mola Mola.


When I listened to Mola Mola, the amp was not fully broken in, so it exhibited some excesses in transient response, and some transient behavior that might have been traces of intermodulation.... Difficult to say if the issues are inherent to the device, or they were a product of incomplete break-in.


Hence, I currently prefer the Pascal M-Pro2-based Rowland Continuum S2 over Mola Mola.... An integrated that I find infinitely graceful.


On the other hand, the Rowland M525 mono based on Pascal S-Pro2 might not be as subtle as Mola Mola.


Note that I have not listened yet to the Rowland M125 bridgeable amp, nor to the Daemon super-integrated... I have heard wonderful things about them, but have no direct experience.


Saluti,

 

More to discover