2. amps-preamps
  3. 1118928361

What's Your Experience with Digital Switching Amp?

The ICE class-D amplifier modules (with self-oscillating transistors) have started a new generation of digital switching amps (DSAs for short) for people interested in high-quality sound at affordable price. If you own one of these amps, I am very curious about how it performs in your home, how it compares to other solid-state and tube amps, and especially how it compares to other switching amps that are starting to appear out there. To start things off, I will go first with you my own—very positive—experience with the Velluto DSA (Analog Research-Technology; 500 wpc; $2800). I’d love to hear your experience with your own DSA in return.

A LITTLE BACKGROUND

I am not an electrical engineer so I hope you will forgive my errors in summarizing the inherent problems with the ICE modules. Out of the box, the frequency response of the ICE module is far from flat. Class-D modules are also very susceptible to RF that can make them sound awful. The ICE modules, like all class-D modules, emit EMI that can create havoc with the sound as well. Like many solid-state (ss) amplifiers, most DSAs have relatively low input impedance that makes them difficult to be driven by a tube preamp. How designers solved these problems affects the amp’s performance.

After a long search—there are quite a few suspicious DSAs in generic boxes out there!—I settled on the Velluto Digital Switching Amp from Analog Reseach-Technology, a firm located here in Dallas, for several reasons: 1) Living in Dallas, I can audition it exhaustively before purchasing; 2) I like previous products by Pat Digiacomo, the engineer who designs and builds these amps in-house with eyes toward great sound at a reasonable cost; 3) Unlike many DSAs that use off–the-shelf chassis and generic front panel, the Velluto comes in a custom chassis with a massive front panel finished in attractive brushed silver. I will skip the description of the amp’s looks, features, and circuitry—I can tell you about them later if you are interested—and go directly to the most important thing about this DSA: its sounds.

THE SOUND OF MY VELLUTO DIGITAL SWITCHING AMP

I have listened to the Analog Research Velluto for a few months now and the sound of this amp is quite unlike that of any other amp that I’ve ever owned, solid-state or tube. The Velluto’s sound is wonderful: silky, dynamic, and expansive. As I just recently RE-discovered Audiogon and read interesting threads about the H2O amps, which I believe uses the same ICE modules as the Velluto, I realize that I am not alone in my enthusiasm for the sound of a DSA. One thing I noticed immediately about the Velluto’s sound was the bass: tight, deep, dynamic, and abundant! Compared to the Velluto, my Rowland Model 7 monoblocks sounded anemic in the bass, which is hard to believe with 300 wpc of class AB power. The bass on my BAT VK-60 monoblocks was as dynamic as the Velluto’s, but with clearly less depth, tightness, and volume. Another thing that captivates me is the Velluto’s midrange. It is very smooth, but not liquid like my BAT’s midrange or neutral like my Rowland’s, or analytical like many SS amps I dislike. Rather, it is silky smooth. I have never heard such midrange before from any amp, tube or solid-state. It is quite an alluring sound, worthy of the amp’s name— I think Velluto means velvety in Italian. The highs are extended and detailed—that was expected from a frequency response that’s down less than 0.3dB at 20 KHz—but surprisingly without the dryness, or edginess of many ss amps.

But the one thing I love most about this amp is its soundstage: it is positively gargantuan. It extends so deep and so wide beyond the speakers that you feel like the walls of your room have dematerialized. The sound just seems to expand for ever beyond the speakers to fade away at a far distance. It is quite an uncanny effect. By comparison, the sound of my BATs is more intimate but bunched up in the middle with far less information around. It becomes obvious that the BATs, like many tube amps, is missing quite a bit of high-frequency information which, by subtraction, gives the illusion of a very focused and dynamic midrange. I now much prefer the panoramic sound of the Velluto, especially for orchestral music though the BATs still have their moment with intimate music.

THE FUTURE OF DIGITAL SWITCHING AMPS IN HIGH-END AUDIO

Without trying to be controversial, I feel that many manufacturers with great reputation based their own successful designs will not readily adopt these ICE modules in their new amps. The poor sound of traditional class-D amps will not help promote these new DSAs either. On the other hand, some well-known high-end manufacturers like Jeff Rowland have already started to offer many models based on the ICE modules. When designed right, these new DSAs can remove many limitations of older ss designs: excessive heat, large heatsink fins, cumbersome size, heavy chassis that strain backs and cost a fortune to ship, insufficient power and bass, analytical sound, edgy highs, or constricted soundstage. This is assuming that all the kinks in the DSAs are worked out properly. For example, these amps may have to be rolled off (!) a little more for tube lovers who just can’t get used to the additional information in the highs and the panoramic soundstage—I’m not one of them but some of my friends are. You also have to be extremely mindful of nasty RF and EMI gremlins still sneaking into the sound. The Velluto overcomes these hurdles successfully but I doubt that all DSAs out there have identical sounds.

I am keenly interested in hearing the impressions of other (I hope very happy) owners of DSA amps.

Justin_Time


My Audio System:

Speakers: Watts/Puppies 5
Amps (Balanced): Rowland Model 7s, BAT VK-60s
Preamps (Balanced); BAT VK5, Rowland Consumate w/ phono stage
Analog source (Balanced): SOTA Cosmos, Graham 2.2, Sumiko Geneis, Benz, Koetsu
Digital source: Sony DVP 9000ES (for SACD only)
Power cords: TaraLabs Prism AC Special and RSC; homemade hospital-grade PC
Speaker cables: OCOS Triple runs, MIT CVT, Straightwire Maestro
Interconnects: Onix GMR XLR, homemade XLR (Nutric connectors/microphone cables)
Miscellaneous cables: Audioquest phono cable; TaraLabs digital cable/special termination
justin_time

Showing 2 responses by jafox

jafox
1,447 posts
 
The recurring issue of "Ditch the MIT" in these ICE amps threads without clarifications as to why this should be done gets kinda old. In a response to a similar thread last week, I put a lot of effort to explain some problems I had with an MIT 350 EVO single-ended cable between the Aesthetix Callisto Signature line stage and the H20.

Blaming network boxes for a huge midrange suckout is a bit of a stretch. I would normally expect such a problem at the frequency extremes and this was not the case. Ultimately it sounded like the problem I had was more likely due to an incompatibility issue with the Callisto line stage running the single-ended low input-impedance of the H20. The jury is still out as to whether or not the same MIT cable in an XLR configuration would cause the same problem or perhaps work incredibly well with the H20.

Even though I prefer the sound of the NBS Statement over the MIT 350 EVO or Ref Proline, it's just by a hair due to the NBS bringing on a little more dimensionality. The MIT cable has a more extended top end than the NBS. The fact that both of these cables drive the CAT JL-3 amps from the Callisto with neither having any tonality coherency problems nor dynamic limitations speaks for itself. Both cables in this setup had far more low-level resolution and dimensionality than I could get with the NBS into the H20.

The ONLY component I have had problems while using the MIT IC cable is the H20. The ARC VT130 and CL150 monos, Counterpoint NPS400, Wolcott P220, CAT JL-3 amps, and the ARC LS5, BAT 31SE and Callisto Sig line stages .... all have worked incredibly well with MIT 350 Proline Ref and EVO cables. This is quite a list of tube based products for a cable that is claimed to only work for a few solid state products.

Rather than echo second-hand news here, hopefully people with direct experiences using MIT cables will share their experiences here. Telling us the associated gear and cable model they used will add value to what has worked and not worked for them with the H20 and other digital switching amps.

Compatibility is definitely a factor to assemble any audio system. But throwing blanket statements out there based on heresy serves no purpose. And keep in mind, there is a huge sonic difference within the MIT product line.

"Frankly, for speaker cables, I have found nothing better than the absurdly cheap Speltz Anti-Cables." What else did you try to come to this conclusion? If you are going to make indirect comparisons here, please share with us the other products you tried. Without comparative product models mentioned, such a statement brings on no value. The lack of differences or improvements between speaker cables may have more to do with weaknesses elsewhere in a system.

John
jafox
1,447 posts
 
Mr_Bill: Your response, "Maybe some perceive added depth/distance and lower noise floor as a midrange suckout?", was not at all what I addressed here. I did not imply such a correlation. If the guitar player and the piano are so very far back from the band, when in fact they should be with the band, it is not depth - it is a severe component incompatibility or component malfunction. In the context of the MIT 350 EVO running into the H20's single-ended inputs, there was a huge drop in level in the middle 4-5 octaves. A change to either CAT JL-3 amps or a Counterpoint NPS400 amp and and the midrange suckout problem was gone. I am not attacking MIT cables here. I was simply stating my experience with a severe problem between this cable and the H20. If you read all that I wrote above, you will realize ONLY the H20 had this problem. I find the MIT cables to be exceptional which is why I also use them.
More to discover