Oh and the guy who has done it successfully is only a "semi pro".Semi "for it" because of his statement. (forest and trees mapman)
"evolutionary pathway of audio design that MAY produce even more astonishing results IN THE FUTURE"
The Future of Audio Amplification
Thanks for the link George. Seems like I may be a little more picky than the folks mentioned on that thread. For me that is. As I have mentioned before I, first of all, don’t like the sound of amps crammed into over built chassis, they sound to constricted (congested) to me. I also don’t like the sound of huge transformers too close to the other parts hosting the signal. I don’t like the way heatsinks distort and the list goes on. In general I don’t enjoy big heavy amps, of any type. I also don’t like listening to crossovers or damped speakers or garden hose wire. What I do like is low mass and variably tunable products. Since I use my systems as musical instruments, including the environment, I can see where my views may differ from others here. I can also see where my views might fit into the future of amps more than some here. I really only have two beefs on this forum and neither has to do with what someone likes or believes. My two beefs are internet trolls and folks who talk about stuff they haven't actually done. mg |
My best friend uses a Channel Islands Class D amp and he is comfortable using it. He would like to substitute one of my Class A/B voltage regulated amps which can control the bass of his demanding speakers instead but can't afford the change. He is a very discerning audiophile and part time remastering engineer (worked with Kevin Gray on some top quality LP remasterings over the years). So, he is satisfied for now with even the older technology Class D amp. I've mentioned that I heard the Prana Class D amp and it was musically involving and sounded very good. |
I find Brunos definitions kind of useless.Actually the use of a comparator has nothing to do with whether feedback is needed or not. If its a cheap comparator with offset problems feedback is probably a good idea, but IME the resulting amp will have the problems that many class D detractors (often, myself included) complain about. |
michaelgreenaudio That's ok Michael, here another little read you may be interested in, it from the AES Berlin White Paper presented by EPC's (GaN) Steve Colino and Alex Lidow inventor of the Power Mosfet all those years ago. EPC's White Paper "excerpt" on GaN technology used in the Technics SE-R1 and Merrill Element 118: "You can increase switching frequency and audio bandwidth to reduce the filtering cost. The choice in optimal switching frequency is always a trade-off in EMI profile, efficiency and audio performance. The ability to use much higher switching frequencies before compromising efficiency allows for a much range within which to make this trade-off. The result is a more optimized audio solution without fear of Thermal or EMI boundaries.This is why you'll see, Class-D's with heat sinks inside for each channel like the Technics SE-R1, if they've used the higher 1.5mhz switching speed available to them to use with the GaN. https://abm-website-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/ecnmag.com/s3fs-public/embedded_image/2018/02/figure1.PN... I also asked EPC by email what manufactures other than Technics and Merrill Audio are using or developing Class-D amp with their GaN technology, they replied today, other than the two I mentioned, they said: " We are unable to reveal due to the Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) with our customers.Finally it seems Class-D has stepped it up in a big way in technology because of EPC's GaN technology, and maybe put up a fight against the very best of linear amps for sound quality in the mids and highs, I think they already have that mantle for bass performance. Cheers George |