2. amps-preamps
  3. 1192052948

Class-D amps - a different re view

Martin Colloms, the editor of HiFi Critic (ad-free mag from the UK) have recently published the review of several different Class-D amps, together with an in depth technical analysys and measurments.

His conclusions were not favourable, to say at least:

"I regret that not a single model merits unqualified recommendation. Price is not the issue; the poor listening tests speak for themselves. (...)
At present we have to take the prudent view that good sound might be possible from switching amps, but we haven't heard it yet."

BelCanto REF1000 (ICEpower) - score 10.5 pooints
"The ICE power module used has a dependable reputation, and the design is well built and finished as a whole. While I would not suggest that you shouldn't try this amp, on sound quality grounds alone I cannot recommend it for audiophile use."

Channel Islands D100 (UcD) - score 13 pooints
"While I have reservations about a number of aspects of sound quality, and advise personal audition, given the solid lab results (...) the overall performance and the moderate price, these CA Audio monos do make it to the 'worth considering' cathegory."

NuForce 8.5V2 (proprietary technology) - score 9 pooints
"Yes, the price is good for the power output. Yes it's pretty, light, small and runs cool. However, the sound quality simply does not justify recommendation." (on top of that the NuForce amp measured very poorly - Elb)

Pro-Ject Amp Box (Flying Mole) - score 5 points
"I'm sorry to say that Project (...) was a real disappointment in the listening tests, and can't be recommended."

Just as a point of reference, recently reviewed Krell 700CX scored 100 points, CJ Premier 350 - 110 points and ARC Ref 110 - 135 points.

At least someone have had the balls to say it. This is why HiFi Critic is THE mag to subscribe.
128x128elberoth2
ar_t
165 posts
 
Kijanki:

If you have a 1000ASP, then it will have much more than 22 V on the output terminals, so I would not advise touching them. (Rowlan uses that module in some of their amps.)

As for the output network, I was talking about the damping factor, or Q, of the filter. Not the damping factor of the amp.

If Colloms believes that they have sampling stages inside, then he is ignorant as to their operation, or else one can conclude that he has an agenda. Modern Class D amps of the self-oscillating style (like ICEpower and Hypex/UcD) are basically an amplifier that is unstable, and use that oscillation to generate a carrier wave. (Unlike clocked designs, which no one seemed to like.) They use some simple circuits, in some rather clever manners, to modulate that carrier with the audio signal. Over-simplified story on how they work.
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
what is the reason this thread has generated so many responses ?
muralman1
1,527 posts
 
Increased ownership of class D amps. As little as a year ago, there may have been maybe a dozen posts. Some few of us were championing class D four years ago. We were laughed at then. Now there is strength in numbers. This is great!
guidocorona
4,298 posts
 
I am elated to see in this thread manufacturers discussing merits -- or perceived issues -- with switching amplification. We consumers can only learn from these exchanges. I am however much less comfortable with veiled potshots about one's competition of the type:

"So into what impedance does this spec occur or is it 'marketing'?"

I appreciate a designer being proud of his own products, but there are more effective ways to demonstrate it. . . . than resorting to the 'lower' ground, which is not necessarily deemed a highly regarded marketing technique. Regards, Guido
dazzdax
599 posts
 
Imho Martin Colloms should make apologies because he tried to disqualified class D amps by using pseudo scientific arguments that underlie his lack of knowledge. This is funny: What would Mr. Colloms do if class D was the only type of amplification? Kill himself? :)

Chris
More to discover