Atmasphere,
I take issue, just a bit, with the notion that there is one technology that represents no compromises, based entirely on sonic considerations. I know that all triode, no feedback, and no output transformers have a lot of theoretical advantages, but, some would argue that paralleling multiple tubes to increase output and to decrease source impedance has its drawbacks. I am not arguing that that is the case, but, just pointing out that every technology has its theoretical disadvantages.
That said, I personally like very much what I hear from your amplifiers. There is nothing like a good OTL when it comes to liveliness, energy and sheer fun (something so many designs seem to suck out of music). But, there may be purely subjective reasons to favor another form of amplifier, even if that amplifier is not "objectively" as accurate.
I have only extensively listened to one Class D amp myself. I heard a Rowland (first generation amp which sold for something like $15,000 for the pair) in two systems, in one driving Sonus Faber Anniversarios, and in the other, the same amp driving a custom horn system. I personally did not like the sound, but not because it sounded edgy, as some have commented. To me, that amp, in both systems, sounded shut in on top (lacking "air") and devoid of natural sounding hall cues and realistic decay of notes. The soundfield just sounded artificial and "dry." There was something else "odd" and "unnatural" about the sound that I cannot quite describe, but it was immediately bothersome to me. This was a drop-into-a-system audition with no attempts to find complimentary components and optimize setup, but these same characteristics were evident in both systems which makes me wonder if this was an inherent trait of the particular amp.
I know any one example cannot possibly represent all applications of a particular technology, so I hope to hear other switching amps in good systems.
I take issue, just a bit, with the notion that there is one technology that represents no compromises, based entirely on sonic considerations. I know that all triode, no feedback, and no output transformers have a lot of theoretical advantages, but, some would argue that paralleling multiple tubes to increase output and to decrease source impedance has its drawbacks. I am not arguing that that is the case, but, just pointing out that every technology has its theoretical disadvantages.
That said, I personally like very much what I hear from your amplifiers. There is nothing like a good OTL when it comes to liveliness, energy and sheer fun (something so many designs seem to suck out of music). But, there may be purely subjective reasons to favor another form of amplifier, even if that amplifier is not "objectively" as accurate.
I have only extensively listened to one Class D amp myself. I heard a Rowland (first generation amp which sold for something like $15,000 for the pair) in two systems, in one driving Sonus Faber Anniversarios, and in the other, the same amp driving a custom horn system. I personally did not like the sound, but not because it sounded edgy, as some have commented. To me, that amp, in both systems, sounded shut in on top (lacking "air") and devoid of natural sounding hall cues and realistic decay of notes. The soundfield just sounded artificial and "dry." There was something else "odd" and "unnatural" about the sound that I cannot quite describe, but it was immediately bothersome to me. This was a drop-into-a-system audition with no attempts to find complimentary components and optimize setup, but these same characteristics were evident in both systems which makes me wonder if this was an inherent trait of the particular amp.
I know any one example cannot possibly represent all applications of a particular technology, so I hope to hear other switching amps in good systems.