Thank you, Ralph!
Comments please on: NAD M23 vs c298 vs. other newer Class D
I'm interested in comments about the new-ish NAD M23 amp. It gets rave reviews on the Absolute Sound channel, by Doug Schneider and by the review at Sound Stage, and by others. Reviews describe not only an even response across frequencies, but layering of the soundstage (left-right and front-back) as well as excellent measurements. Some describe the sound as somewhat tube like in the mids and upper range, others as neutral, but all agree it does not have the harshness which typically characterized reports about earlier amps with this design.
I am not giving up my Pass XA 25, nor my QS Mono 60 tube amps. Or my ST-35 Dynaco. What I'm interested in is a another amp in the stable that can play nicely among different speakers (not all are as sensitive as my main 97db ones), and that might bring that snappy dynamic speed to the sound but without making me cringe from the highs.
If you have some opinion of this Eigentakt design, especially in comparisons to Atma-sphere's Class D or other amps with similar technologies inside, please comment. (PS Audio, Bel Canto, et al.)
If you have some opinion of the NAD M23 vs. the cheaper-but-still-Eigentakt NAD c298, I'm interested in that, too.
I'm NOT interested in super pricey amps. Say, above $8k
- ...
- 76 posts total
My WT amp ultra (upgraded Wiim amp) is only $1300. It sounds clean and musical. Compare their sounds below. Alex/Wavetouch audio The sound of NAD C298 The sound WT amp ultra |
Thanks Ralph for your explanation. On a related topic, something I’ve come across in many reviews about different Class-D amps [over the past two years] has to do with a particular explanation describing how the sound can be somewhat "blurred" or "co-mingled / blended" together more so between the left and right channels. As I recall, most were Class-D stereo amps vs individual mono amps for each channel. For my own reference, some of my lower quality Class AB solid state stereo amps do this, yet my pure Class A solid state amps is a bit better at channel separation, not as blurred together. However, my monoblock tube amps keep it all well separated, and distinct between the instruments in a very distinctive way. Admittedly, I’ve not tried any known high quality Class D mono amplifiers yet. I may try this some day when it becomes a compelling "no brainer" to do it. ASK: We get it that you are an engineer. Here is the curve ball question about the "sound". When you compare your own Atma-Sphere TUBE amplifiers to your new Class-D mono amplifiers, what can you share about the sound - What is similar and what is different about the sound stage, depth, placement of the singers voice (more forward or back), and what about channel separation and instrument separation. What is similar, what is different, comparing the sound between your Tube vs. Class D amps?
|
Started doing some extended comparisons between: (a) Hypex based amp (DIY from friend who’s a master builder) Generally the NAD was better:
That’s the report so far. Overall: NAD winning by more than a little bit. My curiousity about @atmasphere Class D amps is growing. Watching reviews and interviews with him about the amps. At the moment, I have a strong suspicion that what I like in tube amps is going to be more present in his Class D’s than in the M23. For now, though, the trials -- NAD M23 vs. Hypex and then the winner of that competition against the Pass XA-25 will go on. The key question will be: what do the better Class D amps bring to the table that the Pass cannot with my very efficient speakers? I am NOT getting rid of the Pass. I am looking to see whether there is something in a Class D that add a new and different character to my stable of amps.
|
- 76 posts total