Debate: Class D amps need 48 hours of warmup

Hey @deep_333 as an engineer, of course I get what you are saying.  Temperature wise the system should be thermally stable within less than half an hour, if not much shorter.

So try to avoid giving yourself a concussion, but truth is myself and others, specifically with ICEpower based amps hear a noticeable benefit in leaving the amps on for more than 24 hours. 

I don't actually know why.  I call it "warm up" for lack of a better word, but it's unlikely to actually be purely a temperature thing, unless there's some odd component that is kind of thermally isolated which would explain it. 

All I can say is my engineering knowledge and my actual listening experience have not lined up. 

Are you a registered professional engineer, or do you just call yourself an engineer?

Hi @lanx0003  - You caught me. I only worked as one ages ago.  These days I’m more into software.  I used to work on motion picture audio equipment back in the day.  Electrical, PCB and mechanical engineering of gear, and sometimes the installation too. 

It would have been more correct for me to say something like "from an engineering perspective, I have no way to explain the reason why these amps seem to need the time they do, and yet I still hear it."

Best,

Erik 

"Are you a registered professional engineer, or do you just call yourself an engineer?"

@lanx0003 - I find that question interesting in that the title "engineer" has sometimes been loosely applied in various industries. 

In our world of home audio equipment, a professional engineering license is not required to design, manufacture, or service electronic audio equipment.  Over the years, some of the very best sounding home audio equipment has been designed and manufactured by individuals who have not earned an engineering degree.  Of course, there are product safety and regulatory compliance requirements that must be met by designers and manufacturers of consumer electronic equipment. 

A Registered Professional Engineer (PE) is licensed to practice engineering on public projects in a particular discipline, or to offer engineering services to the public.  This licensing process is intended to safeguard public welfare by ensuring that registered engineers meet certain educational, knowledge, and ethical standards.  However, many industries employ engineers who have graduated from an ABET accredited engineering college and who perform design and application engineering for projects, products, and processes in cases where professional licensing is not required.  These unlicensed folks are certainly engineers.

The title, "engineer", has also been historically used to identify roles in certain industries where specialized scientific, mathematical, and technological knowledge are required, and in some cases these individuals are performing engineering related services but have not earned an engineering degree.  I would prefer that these roles be identified with a different title, and that people designated as engineers have actually earned an engineering degree, but that ship has sailed.  I would not argue that for some positions in some industries, it is common to identify a person as an "engineer" who is not a "graduate engineer."

@mitch2 In the Civil Engineering field, where I have practiced for over 25 years as a PE, almost every discipline requires that design work be either performed by a licensed professional or, if done by non-licensed individuals within an agency, reviewed, approved, and stamped by a licensed PE. These individuals are often EITs (Engineers in Training), who must also hold an ABET-accredited engineering degree. Those working in civil engineering without such a degree can be certified as Technicians.

Individuals who are neither PE nor EIT but manage engineering projects are typically called Project Managers—not Project Engineers per se. These titles do not represent a hierarchy but rather a rigorously defined delineation of professional responsibility established by state law. That’s why I’m not accustomed to hearing some people casually call themselves “engineers.” It’s somewhat similar to how an instructor or part-time teaching fellow might refer to themselves as a “Professor,” which is in fact the highest and most distinguished academic title.

I understand that those practicing in the field of acoustic engineering are not necessarily subject to the same licensing requirements. As you mentioned, many highly respected individuals design outstanding audio components based on their deep knowledge and experience. However, some people misuse or take advantage of the title “engineer” without the proper awareness or restraint—using it to sound authoritative merely because of the title itself.