-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
How much have digital amplifiers improved in 8 years?
- Thread starter Geezerman
- Start date
DVDdoug
Major Contributor
- Joined
- May 27, 2021
- Messages
- 3,024
- Likes
- 3,979
Probably not much... Do you hear anything wrong?
The sound quality of amplifiers was pretty darn good (or could fairly easily be good) when solid state electronics replaced vacuum tubes.
(The problem with tubes is the output transformer (required on tube power amps). It was, and still is, difficult and expensive to make a good audio transformer.
Almost since the beginning of solid state it's been fairly easy to get low distortion, low noise, and flat frequency response. Since then, most improvements have been in reducing the cost-per-watt and class D helped a lot with that.
The sound quality of amplifiers was pretty darn good (or could fairly easily be good) when solid state electronics replaced vacuum tubes.
(The problem with tubes is the output transformer (required on tube power amps). It was, and still is, difficult and expensive to make a good audio transformer.Almost since the beginning of solid state it's been fairly easy to get low distortion, low noise, and flat frequency response. Since then, most improvements have been in reducing the cost-per-watt and class D helped a lot with that.
The biggest difference IMO is the budget end of things. Chips like the TPA3255 make it possible to get 50 watts per channel of clean power for under $100.
There have been improvements in the mid and high end stuff, but nothing that is actually audible. Making a good class D implementation back in 2013 wasn't hard, just a matter of money.
There have been improvements in the mid and high end stuff, but nothing that is actually audible. Making a good class D implementation back in 2013 wasn't hard, just a matter of money.
Peeps keep conflating class D with digital square waves and calling it digital amplification.
Peeps keep conflating class D with digital square waves and calling it digital amplification.
It's that darn letter "D" I suppose
JW001
Member
When you consider that PCM can be processed by a digital delta-sigma converter to a DSD bitstream and then send to a MOSFET switch for power amplification, this is pretty close to being digital. Certainly pretty far from a class AB power amp
When you consider that PCM can be processed by a digital delta-sigma converter to a DSD bitstream and then send to a MOSFET switch for power amplification, this is pretty close to being digital. Certainly pretty far from a class AB power amp
But who cares/does it really matter? Still doesn't make class D "digital"
JW001
Member
That was my point.
Raindog123
Major Contributor
What is the proper definition of a digital _amplifier_? To me, a “digital power device” is essentially a DAC capable of outputting high currents to drive speakers directly. Eg, this is what some NADs do. But it’s arguable whether it’s truly an “amplifier” (that assumes input and output signal in the same domain, of the same kind)..?
When you consider the performance of the JL electronics Sylph D200 Amplifier Module, cost of good clean power should be quite low soon if not now. That module is TI TPA 3255 based. So, performance is much better. But, if you don't hear much bad coming from the pioneer, it's a moot point.
JSmith
Master Contributor
A "digital amplifier" should probably be referred to as a PWM amp... i.e. LPCM to PWM.
JSmith
JSmith
- Thread Starter
- #15
missed that review.Thanks
Digital??? Do you mean class D?
That means what when you translate marketing speak to ?
They're just class D and they're likely just fine....
Ataraxia
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2019
- Messages
- 136
- Likes
- 76
I'm rotating the KEF R3's I've had for a few years and LS50 Metas I recently purchased. If you can, demo some R3's (or possible upcoming R3 Metas).
Being a couple decibel more sensitive you will have upgraded your speakers and amplification at the same time. I can really tell the difference when I switch back to the R3's.
I'm preferring the R3's so far but I do really like the Metas too. Another plus is they have a very commanding presence in a room.
Being a couple decibel more sensitive you will have upgraded your speakers and amplification at the same time. I can really tell the difference when I switch back to the R3's.
I'm preferring the R3's so far but I do really like the Metas too. Another plus is they have a very commanding presence in a room.
Similar threads
