"D" amps, general discussion who's 1 and why?


There sure seems to be allot of continued "BUZZ" regarding "D" amps. I am reading more and more SET/Tube users and lovers actually recommending and using them.

So what are your thoughts.
128x128dev
Muralman1 said:

"Every time someone brings over a glorified digital filtered digital source, the sound closes up, harmonics are lost, proper gradual decay becomes severely truncated."

I'm not understanding what type of source you refer to. I see that you have a PS Audio Lambda, so you're not anti digital. (I loved my Lambda until the nylon gears on the drawer stripped after many years of usage). Could you give an example of a source that you're speaking of?

I'm using a Playback Designs MPS-5 SACD player with my Rowland with fantastic results. Of course, there are many differences between PS and Rowland (beside the 60-miles between their shops), so they're going to potentially react differently to same sources.

I DO agree that you have to be careful with ICs, PCs and speaker cables with Class D and you need to be aware of RFI and EMI when placing components around these devices. Chassis design is critical to minimize interaction, and some Class D amps are more prone to interaction issues than others.

Dave
Dcstep, as you know, the Lambda is a transport. Mine has a new wheel. Also,
it has been given a big lift in sound by Henry Ho. My DAC is an Audio Note
2.1. This too has been highly advanced with updated electronics. The DAC
has 4 NOS tubes. For tube lovers this is very essential. The tube's
spaciousness and natural delivery is faithfully preserved.

Every over and up sampling player sucks the stage both horizontally and
vertically. Also, all harmonics vanish. The difference is striking. I have had a
Modright tubed Sony SACD here, and with the same negative results.

The tubes do no good in resurrecting the SACD's performance. The digital
filter damages the tube's good qualities.

The why is easy to understand if you have any knowledge of the quantum
mechanics theory. The complete signal is an ever changing pulse of great
complexity traveling near the speed of light. There is no way a circuit can
differentiate and deftly cut out the, "distortion," without taking music
nuances with it. I can prove that here.
Muralman1:

I think that applying quantum mechanics to digital reproduction is quite a stretch. Please share the proofs you mention with us.

BTW, the DSD encoding scheme used on SACD does not use a digital filter on playback. That's one of its advantages.

Also note that almost every digital recording made in the last 15 or so years was made with a delta sigma oversampling A/D converter, so your digital sources (CD and SACD) have already seen one round of oversampling and digital filtering before they get to you. Since you're hearing something musical from your DAC, it would seem that oversampling and digital filtering are not per se robbing digital of musicality.

I think that comparisons using "every", "always", and "never" are suspect. The world is more complex than that.

My $.02
Post removed 
steidguitars, your point is interesting. I wish that our statements were followed by links to reliable sources on regular basis.
But the problem here is that you are assuming that class d is not able to play overtones and that has no basis on real facts.
It's possible also that class d is so faithfull that plays back recordings without artifacts that where not intented in the first place or you are confusing overtones with distortion - class d is known for lack of distortion introduced in the signal. this is pure speculation.