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:

  1. Frequency balance — Is the tonal response even across bass, mids, and treble, or does it favor certain regions?
  2. High-frequency texture — Are the highs extended and smooth, or edgy, grainy, and fatiguing?
  3. Bass definition — Is the low end tight and articulate, or loose and bloated?
  4. Midrange character — Does the midrange feel present and natural, or recessed and thin?
  5. Transient speed — Does the amp respond quickly to dynamic attacks, or does it sound sluggish and rounded?
  6. Dynamic range — Does it scale convincingly from quiet passages to loud ones, or compress the difference?
  7. Soundstage width and depth — Does it create a convincing three-dimensional image, or sound flat and narrow?
  8. Image specificity — Are instruments and voices placed precisely, or do they blur and wander?
  9. Background noise floor — Is the silence between notes actually silent, or is there grain, haze, or hash?
  10. 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.

hilde45

Here is my two cents: I have not experienced listening to many Class D amps, but I have not yet heard one that would sway me into buying it over a comparably priced A/AB amp. That said, there are advantages in weight and size of most Class Ds. But they seem to lack the weight of the bass and they sound rolled off in the highs to me. In all fairness it could have been the amps I have heard (none above the$6K price point). But I am still not convinced.

And as a side note, I have a close friend that has an incredible system with Sound Lab A1 speakers with a home-made tube pre-amp and Jeff Rowland amps & DAC. He has personally known Mr. Rowland since at least the 1980s when Jeff was just doing electronic repairs and started developing his own amplifiers and formed Rowland Research. I remember my friend telling me about the excitement Rowland had about the "new" ICE module that was the beginning of the Class D era. That was over twenty years ago. After trying to make the Class D amps, Rowland eventually gave up and abandoned the technology as he could never get fully satisfied with the end result; he could not get the sound to be up to his high standards. Today, if you look at the brands offering Class D, it seems to be many of the mass marketing manufacturers, because they can be made affordably. Now of course there may be exceptions to that, with some specialized boutique firms still trying to make it work. I think that speaks for itself: the sound of Class D is still evolving, but when a well respected high end amplifier engineer leaves it aside, I will too.

@cooperdude6 – YES to your post. Yes, yes, yes!

So...Listening update: I had a chance to hear the Boulder 866 amp in my system, with all the same variables the same (as my other amp trials).

The Boulder has all the benefits of the Class D amps I heard, but none of the downsides. Lots of great, tight bass, crisp percussion, and accurate and natural midrange that is not warm like my Pass but not Benchmark sterile. Music sounded natural, soundstage was fantastic.

This data point tells me – for my ears, in my system – that good Class A/B amp can do the things I thought I had to go to Class D for. I no longer think that. There is nothing "inevitable" about Class D to me, and the Class A/B used market has lots of options.

I've had personal experience with a handful of Class D amps and heard many more at some shows. I've always experienced the most musical result when they have been combined with tube preamps.  And of course, the cables and speakers make a difference, too.

And of course, the cables and speakers make a difference, too.

The cables, yes; but speakers?

 

@cooperdude6 , FWIW, Rowland’s current offerings, the Daemon and Continuum 2 integrated amps, are Class D. Pascal modules, as far I understand, with, of course, Rowland & Holm magic added.