Who tried Class D only to return to S/S or Tube

The Rowland was, I believe, a 500 series. (301"s?) It went from Atlanta in my car to my home after audition where the previous owner claimed he had owned it and it had been in his system for 2 years. Definitely broken in. It had the same sonic signature as the Bel Canto 500 References that I had such high hopes for.

The highs on all of these amps did have the "unbroken in" sound of limited extension, chunky mids. It was the upper mid distortion that drove me crazy, sort of like original cd players had. 4-12 khz was just a mess. Resolution, yes, due to a really good noise floor, but a harsh and not so musical sound. Maybe I'm not being fair, since I did not own any of them long enough to "tune" cables to their particular needs, but I didn't hear anything promising me that it would be worth the time and money.

It's for sure that technology has progressed way beyond the days when everyone used ICE stuff (and it all sounded the same). I remain curious and it still amazes me that SS amps of any sort work as well as they do (and I've owned a lot of them).

However, I just turned 60 and settled into a Mac 275. I have owned so many amps, etc. that I'm just going to listen to music for a change.

Yes ,the class D amps from a few years ago were unlistenable to me as well. I do
not think many of us are touting past class D designs as being musical and
competing with other class amps .Only in the latest implementations are they
competing with other classes these days .

Hi Jeff, I suspected as much... The amp was probably a pair of M501 monos or M201 monos... Unlikely to be the M301 monos, unless each chassis weighed about 95Lbs. Each M501 chassis instead might weigh some 20Lbs, and is about 7.5 inches wide only. is

M501 was a basic implementation using the ICEpower 1000ASP module. Very powerful and clean, but.... Subtlety and high musicality were not its main features. I heard the M501 several times at RMAF.... I deemed its sound not to be involving at all... ANd yes, treble can have a rather cold quality to it, which also means that if complex treble passages go through M501, you might hear more than a bit of harshness.

For the ICePower 1000ASP to sound good, it requires either the fine work done by Stronczer with the REF1000 Mk.2, or the PFC rectifier and custom power supplies that Rowland used in its higher end amps based on the same module, such as the M312 that I had for several years.

Rowland does market an external PFC rectifier called PC-1 which is compatible with M501. People who used PC-1 on M501 report the sound to be completely different, and to have approached M312.

Regardless... All of this is in the past.... M201, M501, M312, M301 are all 3 or four generations old. Class D has made significant strides since these 4 legacy Rowland amps, the only one whose sound I consider excellent for today's standards
is the M312, which shows up very seldom on Audiogon.... Its owners tend to keep it for a long time.

Regards, G.

In my main system now I use Class D amplification. I do rotate between the different kinds of amps to just get different flavors of sound. Right now I have my Jolida JD502P with Tung Sol KT150 tubes powering my Ohm Walsh MicroTall SE. The Jolida does fine with powering them and is a nice space heater in these cold days. With the system/speakers I have I found Class D works best.

I recall that Stereophile put the PS Audio HCA-2 in the 'Class A' 
category... kind of curious how they would rate it today ??

I had one and although my setup has changed a bit...my acoustic memory would have the Class D Audio 470C showing the HCA-2 the door !
For the money spent this amp reminds me of the NAD 3020 that I used with my DCM Time Windows, both of which I bought new at the time.

This amp could easily hold you over till the 'dust settles' a bit in the class D wars...and for next to nothing (relatively speaking) !!