You can get more power for less, in most places. the NAD is nice, but you can get the same Purifi module for far less (I have the C298, which I bought used). Or order the Purifi from Alan March-I have no changes to get my hands on Purify amp in my country. So I guess I would blindly buy M23. At least I will be future-proofed in amp section.
Purify modules benefit greatly from good power supply, and one in M23 is definetly better. Also with C298 I will surely have upgrade itch)You can get more power for less, in most places. the NAD is nice, but you can get the same Purifi module for far less (I have the C298, which I bought used)
They’re both transparent,I’ve heard both,zero difference except to your wallet.Purify modules benefit greatly from good power supply, and one in M23 is definetly better. Also with C298 I will surely have upgrade itch)
M23 will close amplification question.
Nevertheless C298 is still a great option.
Little late to party but, i am linking to a video I have found the clearest explanation of nyquist-Shannon for non engineer types. At least for me, it was the first time I really “got” what was going on (and why ladder based dacs can’t compete with delta sigma):"Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) is a fancy term for describing a type of digital signal"
Looking at that now.Little late to party but, i am linking to a video I have found the clearest explanation of nyquist-Shannon for non engineer types. At least for me, it was the first time I really “got” what was going on (and why ladder based dacs can’t compete with delta sigma):
Indeed. Unfortunately neither addresses the common misconception that PWM is per se a digital signal.Have you also seen Monty? A fantastic demo of similar, debunking the myth of stair steps, and demoing the impact of reduced bit depth (Increased noise floor) and how to minimise the audibility of that through dithering.
True - but that is because they are not trying to. They are both discussing PCM digital encoding.Indeed. Unfortunately neither addresses the common misconception that PWM is per se a digital signal.
Indeed. That is why I was a bit surprised by the quote - quoting erroneous (or over-simplified) stuff without countering it is not useful.
It doesn't help that PWM and PCM both encode/represent an analogue signal and only differ by one letter in the acronym.Indeed. That is why I was a bit surprised by the quote - quoting erroneous (or over-simplified) stuff without countering it is not useful.
Stable at turn on: So why would someone leave it idling 27/7 in case they wanted to use it?Would it be possible to measure the idle power consumption?
Admittedly, I might be the only one interested in this, since my thread on the subject did not get much traction. But usually it is not information that can be found in the specifications, and since many of these power amplifiers perform similarly, it could be a deciding factor.
And I would play at low volumes: WHY?The concept of having extra headroom is bullshit. More power = more loudness. That’s it. In low volumes having a high power amp is useless
I still want to know why someone would want to leave it on all the time?If you record the idle energy usage with Kill-a-watt for many popular amps you will find idle power consumption is a large portion of the power consumed. Below are some examples:
1. The Buckeye Purifi uses 14W while idle and 14.5W is all that's required to power the Revel F328BE to 75dB only 1/2 a watt difference. That's a decent sound level for many uses. You start to realize the power use while idle can be close to the same as with background music level use.
2. Buckeye NC502MP uses 23W while idle. 24W takes the F328Be to 81dB.
3. Monolith 7x200 uses 140W while idle. It rises to 185W with the Denon 4700 volume at 65.
4. Denon 4700 uses 138W while idle. At a volume of "65" energy use increases to 185W in stereo or 200W with Auro-3D. If you configure the 4700 in pre-amp only mode (no internal amps available) energy use drops to 46W no matter what volume or speaker configuration is used.
Some may think these devices use a lot less energy while idle but that's not what testing shows.
Even so, I can use 400W for an hour and it's still less than 25 cents if I use it during low power times. As long as I turn off my gear when not running it's not a big deal. However, if I was leaving amps on all day thinking they were auto shutting off efficiently then the phantom power drain could be significant depending on the actual energy draw. Only testing would show the true power use.
Do you live there? My son does and has (he was born & raised there).It has been literally decades since "Made in China" had anything to do with a product's quality.
blanket statement. Doesn't include the use cases of others.Still you don’t need 100s of watts if you look at a McIntosh power amps at reasonable levels, it doesn’t even cross 10 watts !!
Do you live there? My son does and has (he was bon & raised there).
I can say that they can make (and do) just as shoddy gear (for longevity) as anyone else.
Which is why we have sites like this:
To let us know which products from anywhere meet the standards that they should. (including longevity).
But, it sounds to me, as if you do
have an impartial outlook
HAVE AN AGENDA.
And have a good day.