Researching and comparing any online notes that can be found for studying Tube / Class A amp designs vs. different ClassD designs while attempting to understand any loss that still might occur through the Analog signal → pulse encoding → switching → analog reconstruction process.
Reference to good old standard Tube / ClassA SS amps, with:
- Continuous waveform (no encoding)
- Natural harmonic structure (2nd/3rd order) harmonics
- No switching or reconstruction
Hearing in midrange: Flesh-and-blood vocals, wet texture, where decay trails linger naturally, slight bloom around, close to "realness"
-vs-
Reference to "older" ClassD architecture and designs, having:
- Tiny timing errors = loss of microtexture
- Harmonics don’t decay as naturally
- Can sound:
- “dry”
- “flat”
- or slightly “synthetic”
-vs-
Reference to newer ClassD architecture and designs, having:
- Faster switching (GaN)
- Lower dead time → fewer timing errors
- Higher switching frequency → easier filtering
Listeners reportedly hearing:
- Much better "inner detail"
- Cleaner "harmonic structure"
- Less “digital glaze”
But still:
- Not truly continuous like tubes or Class A
- Still a reconstructed waveform
👉 Findings: "approaches analog" flow — but "doesn’t fully become it"
-----
AXPONA 2026 - ClassD?
It will be interesting to read and view show reports after Axpona ends to learn just how many ClassD amps are presented in the show rooms. So far, still seeing lots of tube amps and Class A/AB amps there viewed on the walk-thru videos over the past few days. Hoping others who attended post more here with updates, Thx.

