@hilde45 And everybody that owned a Sit-3 and tried/bought a Sit-4 will never go back to the 3. Guttenberg had the Sit-3 and XA-25 at the same time. He discussed the differences on one of his vids and he got rid of the Sit-3. He also did a vid on the Sit-4 and 5 and pretty sure he discussed the difference between the 3 and 4.
Expanding the Class D Conversation: How Would You Characterize Their Differences?
Expanding the Class D Conversation: How Would You Characterize Their Differences?
I'm currently trialing the NAD M23 (1st gen. Eigentakt-based), and I find it intriguing enough to want to understand it better — which means understanding the broader sonic landscape of class D. So I'm crowd-sourcing.
In a recent exchange, the estimable Ralph Karsten (Atma-Sphere Music Systems) made two comments that stopped me cold. For those who missed it, here's what he said:
"IME, class D amps vary in sound more than tube amps, which is to say, quite a lot."
"IMO there is a bigger difference between various class D amps than you hear between various tube amps. IOW just because you heard one class D amp says nothing about how the next one might sound."
Link: https://forum.audiogon.com/posts/2885828
As I think through this more carefully, these are genuinely important claims. My own experience with tube amps confirms that they produce audibly distinct characters across topologies and designs. If Ralph is right and class D exceeds that range, then generalizing from one class D experience to another is even more hazardous than I assumed.
One specific question for Audiogon members:
If you have a Class D amp or have compared class D amplifiers, how would you describe their character(s)?
Here are some criteria I use:
- Frequency balance — Is the tonal response even across bass, mids, and treble, or does it favor certain regions?
- High-frequency texture — Are the highs extended and smooth, or edgy, grainy, and fatiguing?
- Bass definition — Is the low end tight and articulate, or loose and bloated?
- Midrange character — Does the midrange feel present and natural, or recessed and thin?
- Transient speed — Does the amp respond quickly to dynamic attacks, or does it sound sluggish and rounded?
- Dynamic range — Does it scale convincingly from quiet passages to loud ones, or compress the difference?
- Soundstage width and depth — Does it create a convincing three-dimensional image, or sound flat and narrow?
- Image specificity — Are instruments and voices placed precisely, or do they blur and wander?
- Background noise floor — Is the silence between notes actually silent, or is there grain, haze, or hash?
- Long-term listenability — After an extended session, do you want to keep listening, or has something been quietly fatiguing you?
If you can include relevant system context — room, speakers, preamp — please do. Those variables will help me interpret what the amp itself is contributing.
I'm less interested in rankings than in understanding what Ralph mentioned, namely the [vast] range of sonic signatures class D is capable of. Eigentakt, Hypex, Pascal, Purifi, GaN-based, etc. — all fair game.
Price is no constraint here — I'm interested in the full range of what's out there.
- ...
- 355 posts total
@riaa_award_collectors_on_facebook Sit-4 and Sit-5, eh? Boy this site is dangerous. |
@hilde45 The 5's are monoblocks like the SIT-1. Completely different sonic presentation than the "4". More romantic/bloomy according to reviews. |
My understanding from a bit of research: the SIT-3 and SIT-5 use similar topology, the difference being output devices and power. The SIT-3 uses transistors Pass had made but the company is out of business. The SIT-4 and SIT-5 use much larger and heavier duty parts from Tokin in Japan, but they were wiped out in the Fukishima disaster. Pass brought most of the stock, so he can build more SIT amps. The SIT-5 are mono blocks and rated at 40W/8R and 60W/4R and can drive normal loudspeakers. The SIT-4 has an output impedance of about 4 ohms, so even driving an 8 ohm load, 50% of the power is lost. That's probably suited for single driver, high impedance loads. Supposedly the SIT-5 sounds similar to the SIT-3, as both use common drain topology. Given the lower watt output of the SIT-3, I suspect it sounds special though the mono block design of the SIT-5 is probably an advantage. |
No problem driving the music and a finesse that no Class D amp really can do. @hilde45 The only way for this statement to make sense would be if you'd heard every class D amp made. I'm guessing that isn't the case? If SITs (also known as VFETs) had gained more acceptance in the semiconductor industry, things might look very different now. SITs have triode-like linearity and even have a soft clipping characteristic. |
- 355 posts total