Class D Technology

Are you going to be producing an amplifier anytime soon?

Nope. Not my lot. I’m just a critical listener reporting what I hear and trying to understand why.

I already have two generations of Bel canto Class D amps. I have yet to hear any hint of brightness ever with the newer one. Even with Dynaudio Contour monitors known to lean that way with the wrong amp. It is an all in one integrated the C5i so less to get wrong or right when matching . In fact one of the reasons I bought it was to be able to compare and contrast with what I had. And guess what, better bandwidth and improvements in general with a newer and still evolving technology is exactly the thing that leads me to keep testing the waters.

As I said I do not doubt the relevance of bandwidth in theory, only is it an issue of enough magnitude in practice that most people would care these days when things are done well otherwise.

Some people report brightness in some Class D amps. Same true with other SS amps. Probably even with tube amps to a lesser degree. But I am not hearing it at all ever, in fact less than ever, with my latest and greatest Class D amp. So I do not find the fears bandied about with the technology in general to be warranted at all in practice.

Nor am I saying all Class D amps perform equally well either. Only the ones I own and know well for sure. That just proves to me it can be done now and today. I am not alone there I would say. YM always varies.

Its nice to hear a maker of tube amps and another of passive pre-amps gives the competing technology some credit. Its only fair to point out where the achilles heels lie. Every product has one. All good information for the educated consumer to mull over when making a decision.

Here is part of Lamm Industries ML3 Signature amplifier by Michael Fremer in 9/2013 Stereophile.

The ML3s produced the most glorious, palpable, airy, detailed midrange I’ve ever heard from reproduced music. That part is easy. They pushed that performance envelope without going all greasy and congealed over time, as some tube amps do after the initial appeal of warmth wears off.

The ML3’s standout features were its natural re-creation of instrumental attacks, generous sustain, and lifelike decay—all as close to live as I’ve heard, if nowhere near the real thing. It was quiet, fast, detailed, dynamic without reservation, transparent, airy, and extended on top. No sharp edges unless the recording had them, and no boredom-inducing global softening. The pair of them produced an enormous sense of space when that was appropriate, and, within that space, images of exceptional delicacy, three-dimensionality, and body.

It should be good for $140k/pair. This amplifier has measured -3dB bandwidth at about 50kHz - which is 15kHz less than my class D amp, that supposed to suffer from wrong harmonics summing. Please notice words "airy, and extended on top". Imaging also did not suffer.

He also stated:

Most startling, though, was the ML3s' effortlessly clean and airy high-frequency extension. 

Full text:  http://www.stereophile.com/content/lamm-industries-ml3-signature-monoblock-power-amplifier#HxPd7KZt3...

I will try Class "D" when it get's as common as "bacon and eggs". In the meantime I will maintain my staunch prejudice against Class "D".

Did you know that the vast majority of people who hate "Black" people have never seen one up close and personal. If that can be accepted, I'm sure my stance on Class "D" amps can be accepted; in both cases there is no logical or rational reason for such a stance.

But seriously, I have already "verified" that computer sonics, and analog sonics, are impossible to tell apart, if the computer is done right; evidently it depends on the level of switching; but there are many indistinguishable differences that "audiophiles" claim to hear; such as six 9's copper; 99.9999% pure.

While there is a difference in the quality of interconnects, and it is due to the composition of the wire, the composite of silver plus copper for example, but that also has a scientific variable in ohms. When so many minute differences are carried to such great extremes, accompanied by extreme prices; without any scientific merit, I for one am quite dubious, as in the case of interconnects. I strongly suspect that almost any difference is interpreted as better; how else could you explain a 1K price for a 6 foot piece of copper wire?

Some of these differences are at a "subconscious" level; tube, and solid state for example. I think SS is best for rock, and tube best for "smooth sounds and female vocals"; but I am speaking of a tube pre and SS amp, where the difference is even smaller; when both are SS, then it's audibly obvious.

There are many dubious things on this forum, that I "strongly" suspect are no more than opinion, but "placebos" are good for one's mental health; that is, if the health of one's bank account can accommodate this feel good luxury.

I suspect I have become an "Audiophile"; it snuck upon me when I wasn't looking.  

Oh no, o!  Say it isn't so! What about the sonic influence of various dielectrics (smearing of the sound due to signal "absorption and release" time-misalignment), the winding geometry (reducing RF/EMI noise and phase shift), the use of active shielding (accomplishing the same as the first two to an even greater extent), and Graphene (improving conductivity), not to mention optimally matching capacitance and inductance to the input/output sweet spot of your equipment and speakers?

I don't know what cabling you are using, but I hope that some good ones "snuck up upon you when you weren't looking" for the sake of your excellent preamplifiers (and your ears). 

Best to you o,
Dave