That occurred to me, too. Still pretty effective.Obvious troll is obvious.
If you look at one of the many Genelec investigations and white papers, their conclusion from 2013 showed that the tecnique were good enough that year.Anybody who has been reading/watching hifi reviews is highly likely to have seen or heard the regurgitated comment that “class D sucked way back, but is now good.” Sure.
My question is; when did it start not to suck? Who made the module?
Just curious if there is a known delimiter out there.
Genelec was being a bit conservative, which is understandable as a class leader in Pro audio. Cost mattered to them, too.If you look at one of the many Genelec investigations and white papers, their conclusion from 2013 showed that the tecnique were good enough that year.
It doesn't matter if it's DG or DH (but you know that by now for sure) they (in the official documentation) described it as class D with H bridge which you surely remember as you mocked to it earlier.Why do I need the rest? You claim Hypex amps are class DG, so I ask why you think that is.. If I understood that wrong, enlighten me.
Fell free to ask them.H-bridge != Class H
They are not digital (wel the vast, vast majority is not). They are as analog as any other amplifier topology.Digital amplifiers
Oh, now it doesn’t matter? This is getting better by the minute The H-bridge is not in dispute here, calling it class H is!It doesn't matter if it's DG or DH (but you know that by now for sure) they (in the official documentation) described it as class D with H bridge which you surely remember as you mocked to it earlier.
No need, all over the internet there are plenty of sources showing us what a class H amplifier is, and it’s not an amplifier with an H-bridge. Many others have explained as much. You seem to be quite alone with your reasoning. Otherwise @boXem | audio can be probably a stand-in for Hypex (if he dares ), since he designs and sells the damn thingsFell free to ask them.
For the rest ask them directly!Oh, now it doesn’t matter? This is getting better by the minute The H-bridge is not in dispute here, calling it class H is!
No need, all over the internet there are plenty of sources showing us what a class H amplifier is, and it’s not an amplifier with an H-bridge. Many others have explained as much. You seem to be quite alone with your reasoning. Otherwise @boXem | audio can be probably a stand-in for Hypex (if he dares ), since he designs and sells the damn things
I would be happy to help, but feeding my kids is slightly higher in my priorities than feeding ... ....Otherwise @boXem | audio can be probably a stand-in for Hypex (if he dares ), since he designs and sells the damn things
Close, Class B can do 78% efficiency theoretically. A lot of those little battery powered transistor radios were Class B.Class A = bias current flows through the output devices all of the time. Most wasted energy and heat, max theoretical efficiency ~50% for a push-pull design (only ~27% for a single-ended design IIRC). Commonly used for low-level circuits like preamps and power amp input and driver stages, rarely for output stages since it is so inefficient. More common in tube amps these days, I think.
Class B = bias current flows half the time, so in a push-pull design one device is on and the other is off. Typically one device amplifies the (+) half of the signal and the other the (-) half as it swings around ground (0 V, or a common bias voltage). Can achieve ~67% efficiency in theory. In practice there is crossover distortion around the crossing point as one device is switched off and the other turned on since it does not happen instantaneously. Used for some power amplifiers in the past (do not know about today), with feedback used to reduce crossover (and other) distortion.
Class AB = biased in class A for small signals then moves to class B. This lets small signals around the crossing point stay in class A for lower distortion, then as the signal increases and moves out of the small signal region transitions to class B to save power.
Class C = bias current flows less than half the waveform cycle. The "missing" energy is usually generated by a resonant circuit (e.g. inductor/capacitor (LC) tank). Common in RF circuits where high power is needed and distortion less an issue, and oscillators which are narrow-band (audio is very wideband, spanning multiple decades) and incorporate a resonant circuit by design.
Class D = bias current flows only as output devices switch states, in a form of pulse modulation (pulse width, frequency, or both). Can achieve >90% efficiency. The high switching frequency is provided by a clock source or (for most audio amps) is self-generated by the circuit. The output pulse train is filtered so only the fundamental signal remains. See https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/class-d-amplifiers-101.7355/
Class E, F = utilize switching as well but constrain the switching to certain points in the signal cycle (e.g. at voltage or current zero crossings) for higher efficiency since less power is dissipated in the switching transistors. These are used exclusively in RF circuits AFAIK. Class E is used in tuned amplifiers (narrowband, again) and class F is used for generating harmonics of the fundamental so you can say build a high-frequency oscillator output from a lower-frequency circuit.
Class G, H = wrap a varying power supply around the core (typically AB) amplifier to improve efficiency. By changing the power supply voltages it uses (wastes) less energy for small signals by applying low supply voltage, then increases the voltage as required as the signal gets larger. Class G uses discrete rails so the power supply switches between two or more (high/low) voltages. Class H uses a tracking supply that varies continuously with the signal level.
Moi? It's not exactly a new thing otoh....You said: ‘Did you take a Rip Van Winkle type nap or something?’
maybe you need a nap yourself, you are starting to sound a bit grumphy
At some level it is similar. I still wish we could see the schematic of a leading model or three of class D amplification with power supply attached or not.Class D resembles the primary side of a SMPS rather closely, wouldn't you say?
At some level it is similar. I still wish we could see the schematic of a leading model or three of class D amplification with power supply attached or not.
Nice! I have missed that one! <3Probably before you were born. 1976.
Sony TAN-88:
View attachment 225489
Yes, thats a SMPS and yes, they're VFETs in a Class D design. Yes, it's a die-cast block of alloy making up the chassis. It weighed only 11kg, put out well over 160wpc@8R, S/N over 110dB, distortion curve flat from 10W to nearly 180W.
Bruno Putzeys was only three (3) years old when it was sold.
That Sonic Impact tripath amp has become and was legendary, I remember reading the 6moons review and being totally intrigued and thoroughly impressed I got one as quick as I could. Subjectively I though it was the best amp I ever used on my Maggie SMG's, I know, I know, but damn it, it was!That isn't really a class of amp as such, it's a trademark by Tripath who made class d chip amps which were used in various consumer devices.
Yes, duh, thanks for the correction. When I first had to derive the efficiency equations it was all single-ended stuff, and I keep having that in mind. I agree, ~78% or so for push-pull B designs, that sounds right. My bad; I need to correct my old post. I had already updated the class A efficiency number but overlooked class B.Close, Class B can do 78% efficiency theoretically. A lot of those little battery powered transistor radios were Class B.
Some are pretty heavily biased into class A, but the trend is away from that. I also didn't mention things like Benchmark's AHB2 using feedforward (FF) compensation to clean up the output. I played around a lot with FF designs but in the pulse world of radar it was a mixed bag -- much faster pulse response, but tended to overshoot and long settlers (sort of like doublets in feedback amps, but different cause).As for Class AB - better to think of it more as "Class B, but with a small idle current to remove crossover distortion" IMO - they've been standard power amps for ages (80+ years) for a reason.
Well, it matters a little, but the resonators filter much (hopefully most) of it away. Fine if you don't need a wideband amp.C, E, F yeah all RF amplifiers. Distortion doesn't matter - just use a tuned circuit.
Others have made that observation as well and I tend to agree. That said, while I've some experience with them, I do not claim to be an amplifier designer, certainly not audio amps. Did a few, mostly they worked...Class D resembles the primary side of a SMPS rather closely, wouldn't you say?
I bet the cast metal chassis was to keep shrapnel from injuring people when the electronics exploded. Looks very version 0.89 to me.Probably before you were born. 1976.
Sony TAN-88:
View attachment 225489
Yes, thats a SMPS and yes, they're VFETs in a Class D design. Yes, it's a die-cast block of alloy making up the chassis. It weighed only 11kg, put out well over 160wpc@8R, S/N over 110dB, distortion curve flat from 10W to nearly 180W.
Bruno Putzeys was only three (3) years old when it was sold.
It was actually a pretty great amp and quite reliable, unlike some other amps of that or this day. IIRC it had better output protection than most other amps. You want shrapnel, look no further than the late great Blaze Linear 700 I owned that self-destructed several times, even driving a fairly benign load (Maggies).I bet the cast metal chassis was to keep shrapnel from injuring people when the electronics exploded. Looks very version 0.89 to me.