Audiophiles, generally don't like class D amps!

[roog]

Funny but in discussion with an audiophile colleague, I uttered, "well the truth hurts" and he replied, "yes it does". Quite telling really, so some admit that they don't want the truth, they prefer it coated with sticky goo and sugar sprinkles, and yet all of their tweaks are in the name of better or improved sound.

I wonder if a reasonable analogy would be to say that we have got used to a poor diet, and that switching to a healthy one is often inspiring at first until you get used to the new and better norm. Ok perhaps that's taking it too far, I think that its all become a bit tribal and no one wants to drift from the herd for fear of being out cast.

 

[fpitas]

Funny but in discussion with an audiophile colleague, I uttered, "well the truth hurts" and he replied, "yes it does". Quite telling really, so some admit that they don't want the truth, they prefer it coated with sticky goo and sugar sprinkles, and yet all of their tweaks are in the name of better or improved sound.

I wonder if a reasonable analogy would be to say that we have got used to a poor diet, and that switching to a healthy one is often inspiring at first until you get used to the new and better norm. Ok perhaps that's taking it too far, I think that its all become a bit tribal and no one wants to drift from the herd for fear of being out cast.

Well, that's a big deal for most people. They tend to travel safely in the midst of the herd. Even getting a technical education appropriate to properly critique audio equipment would make them a boffin in the eyes of their peers.

 

[ahofer]

The little I've suffered through those forums there was a guy or two who were the "experts". Seldom did they seem to have any technical know-how beyond soldering.

Yeah, it's pretty funny to see someone at AudioGone speaking perfect nonsense as if it were hard-earned experience or the legitimate result of years of study.

 

[ahofer]

I think that its all become a bit tribal and no one wants to drift from the herd for fear of being out cast.

I post this link a lot, but it is directly relevant to your comment, and explains a lot of tribal behavior:

Beware Inward Apologetics

Beware oft-rehearsed but rarely-performed arguments on why-our-group-is-right: Recently I came across a quotation that expressed, with wonderful clarity, something that I kind of half-knew but had not articulated so well to myself. The historian John P. Meier …:

www.overcomingbias.com

 

[danadam]

They can't all be wrong can they?

Depends.

They can't be wrong for not liking them, because imo "wrong" is not applicable to just "liking" or "not-liking" them.

But they can invent reasons for why they don't like them, and those can be wrong. And sure, all of them can be wrong. I don't see why not or why that would be surprising.

 

[BDWoody]

The little I've suffered through those forums there was a guy or two who were the "experts". Seldom did they seem to have any technical know-how beyond soldering.

But they likely had signature lines that detail an absurd collection of very expensive and esoteric gear and assorted veil removers, so they have gotten their credibility the old fashioned way. They bought it.

 

[DonH56]

But they likely had signature lines that detail an absurd collection of very expensive and esoteric gear and assorted veil removers, so they have gotten their credibility the old fashioned way. They bought it.

I bought my "cred" with about 40 years of schooling starting with working my way through the last couple of years of high school and all through college (mainly as a TV/stereo repair tech including work in a couple of "high-end audio" stores), followed by years in the field designing and testing all sorts of (virtually all non-audio) toys. Over the years I built up a system that is far into the "audiophool" category for some, and yet I have 'net friends who are aghast at my use of cheap amplifiers and run-of-the-mill cables with my expensive speakers and AVP. Oh well, sounds OK to me. I tend to put my money into the things I think will have the biggest impact on the sound, mainly speakers and processor. And the room, of course. Which reminds me, I badly need a new couch, that will be my next major upgrade.

I have seen class D evolve from limited designs with relatively poor sound and lousy reliability into amps that challenge the SOTA in most every way. Same thing happened with the transition from tubes to transistors, with the same naysayers decrying their performance decades after transistors effectively took over the world. Ironically, decades ago tubes were touted for having lower distortion and better reliability than those early transistor designs, and now lower distortion is "less musical".

I am grateful we have members like @SIY and @atmasphere who really understand tube designs and how to get the best out of them without bowing to the mob.

IME/IMO - Don

 

[Gorgonzola]

It may be a comparison to tube amps. Or it may just be the notorious audiophile imagination at work.

Well of course one must concede that audiophiles have active imaginations. But in case of the typical audiophile impressions I mentioned above, I quite certain that it isn't "just" those imaginations.

I'm talking about very experience audiophiles who have listened to a variety of equipment types over decades. These folks will assert that they "trust their ears", i.e. they don't trust reviews or other other audiophiles necessarily. This also their way of saying that they are not much vulnerable to "confirmation bias". You may accept this or not, but I am an aged audiophile myself and tend to accept what they say as based on well-considered & studied listening.

 

[fpitas]

Well of course one must concede that audiophiles have active imaginations. But in case of the typical audiophile impressions I mentioned above, I quite certain that it isn't "just" those imaginations.

I'm talking about very experience audiophiles who have listened to a variety of equipment types over decades. These folks will assert that they "trust their ears", i.e. they don't trust reviews or other other audiophiles necessarily. This also their way of saying that they are not much vulnerable to "confirmation bias". You may accept this or not, but I am an aged audiophile myself and tend to accept what they say as based on well-considered & studied listening.

You could be right. But then, even when I was younger, most tube amps sounded vague and fuzzy to me. The very best ones sounded like today's SS amps. Obviously I missed many important memos.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Quoting an ME:
Humans have varied and interesting ways of expressing themselves.

 

[delta76]

They believe in much more bizzare things, like cables. Not very difficult to believe in things like a/b will sound smoother, more musical than D. Because, you know, that is what they heard everybody says, it must be true.

 

[Speedskater]

Class "D" amplifiers are used in everything from hearing aids to cell-phones to TV sets to big audio power amplifiers.
So over the decades the technologies have come a long way.
The early hi-fi amps left a lot to be desired, so once something gets into audiophile myths and legends it stays there forever.

 

[DVDdoug]

They are just a bunch of classists.

Oh! ...THAT'S why they like class-A amps!

It seems like class-D is becoming the standard. When you can cram as many transistors as you want into an inexpensive-specialized chip, it's the logical way to make an amplifier.

But in case of the typical audiophile impressions I mentioned above, I quite certain that it isn't "just" those imaginations.

I'm talking about very experience audiophiles who have listened to a variety of equipment types over decades. These folks will assert that they "trust their ears", i.e. they don't trust reviews or other other audiophiles necessarily. This also their way of saying that they are not much vulnerable to "confirmation bias". You may accept this or not, but I am an aged audiophile myself and tend to accept what they say as based on well-considered & studied listening.

In the end, what counts IS what you hear and some people do have better hearing and some people (Amir for example) are trained listeners...

BUT in the "audiophile community" there is a LOT of opposition to scientific, level-matched, listening tests. And they don't generally use "real" terminology like, noise, frequency response, or distortion... They use a lot of words that seem to mean something or evoke a feeling, but it's usually something that can't be clearly defined or measured.

...And there are people who can "hear voices"!

P.S.
It also seems like the audiophile community is mostly dominated by old dudes (my age ) and most of them probably have some normal age-related high-frequency loss (or worse) and they are nostalgic for the vinyl and tube days.

 

[atmasphere]

Well of course one must concede that audiophiles have active imaginations. But in case of the typical audiophile impressions I mentioned above, I quite certain that it isn't "just" those imaginations.

I'm talking about very experience audiophiles who have listened to a variety of equipment types over decades. These folks will assert that they "trust their ears", i.e. they don't trust reviews or other other audiophiles necessarily. This also their way of saying that they are not much vulnerable to "confirmation bias". You may accept this or not, but I am an aged audiophile myself and tend to accept what they say as based on well-considered & studied listening.

Confirmation bias works both ways. Its just as easy to think it will sound good because it measures well.

That's not always the case- but IME this usually has to do with the measurements being an incomplete set. Simply going with 'trusting my ears' makes me really nervous; if I hear something wrong I want to be able to measure why that is so.

Measurements and 'sound quality' have to go hand in hand. If you can hear it, you should be able to measure it (it doesn't always work out the other way around, depending on what is being measured). I often find that the real issue is knowing what to measure and/or figuring out how to do it.

I'm in the camp of Daniel von Recklinghausen in this regard.

 

[SlamTaz]

It's the change to the status quo they don't like. I can be guilty of that too.

It's easy to dismiss a new paradgim as being 'wrong' if it challenges the base knowledge and beliefs systems, especially if it does so, much cheaper, easier and in some ways better.

HiFi was traditionally a difficult, expensive and arduous pursuit. You had to be in it for the long run. Pay your dues, climb the ladder and pay the price. Not anymore. You can jump to the top of the class for not a lot of time, effort or money. It sounds like cheating, but it is not.

^This^

To some, this paradigm shift can be a bitter pill to swallow.

In a way, I would liken it to how the introduction of the Internet created a massive paradigm shift in the manner by which most financial markets work (e.g. i still know people who will not touch net banking with a 10ft pole and still prefer issuing physical checks to pay for their monthly bills.)

 

[computer-audiophile]

When I think of early Class-D Amplifiers, an old SONY model from the eighties comes to my mind. Was considered to be to expensive for me then.
Later I did some experiments with Tripath amps. Their audio quality I would say were harsh and lacking in detail. When I took a closer look at the circuit topology and the functioning in detail, I also had an idea what the reason was. But over the years, manufacturers have made significant improvements to Class-D amplifiers, including the use of better output filters, faster switching frequencies, and improved modulation techniques. The first Class-D amp I remember which pleased me was a Flying Mole amp from Japan in combination with Avantgarde Horn Speakers. This was approx. 10 years ago.

Overall, the evolution of HiFi Class-D amplifiers has been marked by steady progress and significant advancements in both technical performance and user experience. Today, many top-tier audio brands offer Class-D amplifiers that are capable of rivaling traditional Class-A and Class-AB amplifiers in terms of sound quality, while offering a number of benefits in terms of efficiency, heat dissipation, and size. Some of my active monitor speakers have Class-D amps. No problem for me.

 

[wjp007]

One thing I have wondered is why there aren't more direct digital class D amps. After all PWM is a form of digital. Why take a signal, convert it to analog and then back to PWM.

My main beef on some of the highly touted class D power amps tested here is the lower gain they have in order to boost their SINAD specs. I mostly listen to hi-res digital content (SACD preferred), but I prefer my class AB amp over the couple of class D amps I've tried (that were rated high on this site). I wouldn't say I'd be disappointed with any of them, but the class AB feels just more balanced.

 

[kemmler3D]

They can't all be wrong can they?

There are entire forums on the internet dedicated to the sincere belief that the earth is flat, or that vaccines are actually a cover for mind control devices. A reasonably sized group of people being collectively mistaken about how audio works is not hard to imagine in comparison.

So yeah, they can all be wrong!

 

[kemmler3D]

Why take a signal, convert it to analog and then back to PWM.

PCM signals don't directly encode PW so you'd still have a conversion step either way. Even DSD doesn't work using PWM, although it's similar.

 

[mhardy6647]

I go by my experience on other forums. At one in particular which is a very long-standing forum, (shall I name it?), a very high proportion of members are against class D -- even though many have actually recently owned or tried class D in their systems.

The typical remark is that the "tone" of class D isn't right; it doesn't sound "natural" like live performance, especially the treble. In fact the "tone" deficit they refer to is easily explained by the lack of 2nd/3rd order distortion they are getting from their tube equipment or S/S such as Pass Labs. Some of them will admit this explanation, some will not.

But there are a few audiophiles whose tastes have evolved. I can think of one who was a stalwart of tubes for decades but is now loving his Benchmark preamp and power amp. Kudos to our member, @atmasphere, who was and is a maker of highly regarding tube equipment, who is now also making a class D amp of his own design and is, happily, selling lots of them.

Actual statement seen yesterday on an actual, traditional hifi forum (on which I am still a participating member, in full disclosure).

The Purify amp was interesting - at first hearing it seemed to give quite a good "approximation" of the music, but with more auditioning it became increasingly clear that the sound was artificial in the tonality of acoustic instruments and voices when playing opera and symphonic music. In addition the sustain was "chopped off" in comparison, while in the 2a3 amp voices and instruments lingered in the air for their full duration.

The above is part of a specific reply from a very earnest 'downsizing' thread @ AA:

Your Help Is Needed Please - thetubeguy1954 - Amp/Preamp Asylum

Your Help Is Needed Please - thetubeguy1954 - Amp/Preamp Asylum

www.audioasylum.com

The choice of phrase -- "chopped off" -- struck me as fraught with significance given the topic (PWM amplifiers, which certainly do "chop")
We are certainly easily influenced by our expectations.