Class D amp driving Thiel


I was honing in on a 2 channel system and had seriously narrowed down the contenders until last Saturday. After not being impressed with a pair of B&W CM7's I was encouraged to listen to a set of Thiel 1.6.

It was amazing. Driven by a Bryston amplifier they had detail and precision with beautiful tonality. Yes, they did lack bass under 50 hz. But completely different and world's better than the Thiel's I owned and powered with tubes years ago. So now I have to rethink things. I have only a small shelf for the SB3 and amplifier and can't fit (or afford) anything above 30 lbs or 5 inches tall.

Maybe a second hand Krell 400xi would work but Krell's rap is that they can be bright and fatiguing. And I can't do anything bigger or costlier. While the Naim forum has good reports of Thiel's being driven by even a Nait 5i I am a little cautious based on my previous experience. As I learned the hard way you have to muscle up on Thiel's or they sound bright and nasty.

So, the thought of a class D amp came to mind. Small, light, and powerful. Though I haven't even heard one before (hard to find them in Chicago, believe it or not) my interest is piqued. But would it be up to driving the load I am contemplating without getting bright or harsh? Any thoughts but more importantly experiences are appreciated.
wdrazek
My Thiel 1.6's arrive Friday and one of the two amps I'll be experimenting with over the weekend is NuForce IA7-E (the 100 watt version). I am very optimistic as the latest version of this imtegrated is extremely clean and clear sounding, with some of the nicest and least harsh treble extension I've ever heard out of any amp, tube or solid state. I use a REL Strata III for the foundatation.
Art
As long as Class D amps cannot make an accurate looking 10 kHz squarewave, one will not find a place in my listening environment. There are some things that an amp has to be able to do on a test bench accurately or it will never get timbre and harmonic content right, no matter how much tizz and boom it creates for its size and weight.
Stevecham: Speaking as a musician I have yet to hear ANY form of reinforcement, back line, or playback, reproduce the timbre and or harmonic content of acoustic instruments correctly. Most home systems that are assembled to produce "warm" or "musical" aesthetic are the worst at providing accurate playback.

If you ever have the opportunity to visit a quality pre or post production facility you will be struck by the analytical nature of the playback system. Even more stunning is the degradation between the original track recording, the post production, and the media/final product your listening to at home. Some engineers I've worked with work towards bettering speed and the dynamic feel (LP like) of their work so naturally their playback systems need to reflect this input. I'm seeing more and more class D amplifiers powering these systems. Even though some of these systems are by far the most accurate systems I've ever heard it doesn't necessarily make them "right" for everybody's choice in a home system.

Class D amplification is simply another developing tool in the audio world. All amplifiers have shortcomings and class D is no different. I'm not sure what you mean by "tizz" but class D does "boom" real good. I've got a tube amplifier that doesn't produce an impressive square wave either but it sounds sweet to me.

Cheers

Vic

Vic, but that tube amp's squarewave sure does look much better than that D amp.

I am totally cognizant of what happens as soon as acoustic sounds is trasduced to an electronic signal, the phase shifting, the compression...we have to accept that as part of the recording chain. I too am a musician and a recording engineer. But I want my playback system to reflect what was recorded, for better or worse, as accurately as possible. In other words I want the quality of the performance and the production to define the musicality, and, as little as possible, the playback system.