Audiophiles, generally don't like class D amps!

[StigErik]

Technics had Class AA. I want DD ....

 

[TLEDDY]

They can all be wrong, unless you do a blind level matched listening test with the same speakers in the same position with near instant switching between the two amplifiers then alL you are getting is bias from the listener.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This!!

 

[theREALdotnet]

...As long as I can hear Baby Shark reproduced accurately as possible

That is my go-to track for auditioning amplifiers, too.

 

[theREALdotnet]

Technics had Class AA. I want DD ....

Storm in a D cup?

 

[Ratfink]

Well.... appologies if needed...

Im a musician, Sax.

Deal with live stage sound for my combo group.

Entire sound system I built...most the pro sound is crap...all of it overpriced... high quality stuff is unobtainium.

Setup for best live sound...
---Amps (All class D, QSC's)at 90% control levels with line inputs.
---Stacked Arrays
---V Plated Subs
--- EQ's used to filter out noise problems based upon room measurements then sound cheks... no smileys...

Once upon a time.... had to use an (Audiophileeesss) Bass Tube Amp... EQ'd that crap tube hum right out of the mix... still sounded like crap.... only good for keeping a## warm.

Nothing worse than hearing a musicians laziness bad playing habits with noisey sloppy fingerings, crappy unkept noisey instrument mechanics.... clicking, popping, leaky air embousures(this one really chaps my ass... f ing lazy classical clarinet players) yea Red, you know who I mean....

So between Tube Amps and lazy musicians.... class D always... because at least you can eliminate one of the noises...

If the setup cant or isnt simple based on measurements/facts, then in the immortal words of the Denver International Airports Moving Walkways..... "KEEP WALKING!"...."KEEP WALKING!"..."KEEP WALKING!"

Oh, and only ONE exception to this being Steely Dan, they didnt have a choice in Amp Tech back then... its also the reason they didnt tour hardly in early days.... "No static at all..... FM!"

 

[chelgrian]

Well.... appologies if needed...

Im a musician, Sax.

Deal with live stage sound for my combo group.

Entire sound system I built...most the pro sound is crap...all of it overpriced... high quality stuff is unobtainium.

Setup for best live sound...
---Amps (All class D, QSC's)at 90% control levels with line inputs.
---Stacked Arrays
---V Plated Subs
--- EQ's used to filter out noise problems based upon room measurements then sound cheks... no smileys...

Once upon a time.... had to use an (Audiophileeesss) Bass Tube Amp... EQ'd that crap tube hum right out of the mix... still sounded like crap.... only good for keeping a## warm.

Nothing worse than hearing a musicians laziness bad playing habits with noisey sloppy fingerings, crappy unkept noisey instrument mechanics.... clicking, popping, leaky air embousures(this one really chaps my ass... f ing lazy classical clarinet players) yea Red, you know who I mean....

So between Tube Amps and lazy musicians.... class D always... because at least you can eliminate one of the noises...

If the setup cant or isnt simple based on measurements/facts, then in the immortal words of the Denver International Airports Moving Walkways..... "KEEP WALKING!"...."KEEP WALKING!"..."KEEP WALKING!"

Oh, and only ONE exception to this being Steely Dan, they didnt have a choice in Amp Tech back then... its also the reason they didnt tour hardly in early days.... "No static at all..... FM!"

High quality PA gear is not unobtainium it's just very expensive and you have a very short list of suppliers, d&b Audiotecknik and L-Acoustics being the two most obvious ones.

 

[Galliardist]

Maybe most Class D equipment don't look as sexy as the "old school" ones? Guys like shiny blinky stuff.

Still not old school blingy enough, I suppose?

Marantz got a huge amount of criticism for saying Hypex wasn't digital when they released this. I was shunned by two real life friends when they found out I'd bought one, and not over cost as might happen here: I was a traitor to the audiophile cause, and so were Marantz. I wonder how much things have really changed?

 

[StigErik]

It's got blue LEDs. That should count for something.

 

[voodooless]

Marantz got a huge amount of criticism for saying Hypex wasn't digital when they released this.

 

[restorer-john]

View attachment 347503

Still not old school blingy enough, I suppose?

Marantz got a huge amount of criticism for saying Hypex wasn't digital when they released this. I was shunned by two real life friends when they found out I'd bought one, and not over cost as might happen here: I was a traitor to the audiophile cause, and so were Marantz. I wonder how much things have really changed?

Much as I love vintage Marantz, that new styling is so gaudy and cheap looking.

 

[Crosstalk]

Audiophiles can identify a class D amplifier from its size, weight and operating temperature, though they claim they know how "class D" sounds!

 

[Crosstalk]

Much as I love vintage Marantz, that new styling is so gaudy and cheap looking.

Agree, the current gen Marantz is the worst looking ones. The best ones to my eyes is the one like PM16, PM17 and so on. I like their simple styling more than their higher end PM11. Some of their older receivers like the SR8500 looks really superb.

 

[Crosstalk]

Technics had Class AA. I want DD ....

View attachment 347491

You can get double D's outside audiophilia too, if you are willing to hunt!

 

[mhardy6647]

Still not old school blingy enough, I suppose?

It's got blue LEDs. That should count for something.

VU meters, gentlemen! Where are the VU meters?!

Much as I love vintage Marantz, that new styling is so gaudy and cheap looking.

But of course - especially when compared to the elegance of the simple, understated aesthetic of yore.


source: https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Archive-Catalogs/Lafayette-Catalogs/Lafayette-1975-750.pdf




EDIT: All meant in good fun, of course. Fortunately the modern marantz hardware is of decent quality, and (by and large) not eye-wateringly expensive.
In full disclosure, and in fairness, the aesthetics of the current 'massmarket' level marantz componentry doesn't do much for me, but I wouldn't (again FWIW) classify it as ugly nor even cheap looking. I do find it amusing that their current Model 30 and Model 50 amplifiers remind me an awful lot aesthetically of harmon/kardon's late 1950s/early 1960s low- and mid-range components. That's not such a bad thing -- h/k (almost) always did a pretty good job with aesthetic design.

source: https://www.alliedcatalogs.com/flipbook/1958_allied_radio_catalog.html

almost always.

source: My hifi friend and fellow-traveler Brian Salazar's business's site:

Harman Kardon HK670 vintage receiver - SOLD

The Harman Kardon HK670 “Twin Powered” receiver was HK’s top of the line model from 1979 to 1981 and was its last model with an analog tuner. The original retail price was $550, the equivalent to around $1700 today. The HK670 is rated at 60 watts per channel and some sources say this rating is...

holthill.com

 

[voodooless]

This would look much better:

 

[mhardy6647]

This would look much better:

View attachment 347534

Better, indubitably.
I don't care for the porthole motif -- even though, yes, I know it hearkens back to the real marantz.


(a lovely 8B that I had the privilege to rehab some years back)

(random Interenet photo but this does appear to be an actual marantz Nine and not the 1990s reboot, given the "60 cy" label)

 

[voodooless]

I don't care for the porthole motif

Agree with that, but that was a bit much to change into something more decent in a few minutes

 

[DonH56]

View attachment 347503

Still not old school blingy enough, I suppose?

Marantz got a huge amount of criticism for saying Hypex wasn't digital when they released this. I was shunned by two real life friends when they found out I'd bought one, and not over cost as might happen here: I was a traitor to the audiophile cause, and so were Marantz. I wonder how much things have really changed?

Class D is not digital.

 

[Bleib]

Early on I bought a class D amp, it was impossible to notice any difference between it and a regular Denon AB class amp. The one real difference these two had was that the Denon had a lot more power but my speakers were only about 2 meters away from me so I didn't need the power.
I was happy to have the class D amp on all the time, didn't heat things up during summer either. Very neat.

 

[Lux_ury]

I love both for different reasons, but it's not like they dislike class D it's just some prefer pure class A. "It's not the size, it's the power"