[srb]

I tend to disagree.  Have you looked at my gallery?  If not, take a look at my sub that I made.  There is A LOT more then that in material (6061) cost.  If you were to then add my design, machine and assembly time, that's how you get REALLY expensive gear.  Of course, that's without the $50k per month TAS ads.

The Pass enclosure does not have a comparable materials and machining scope to your subwoofer.  It's a steel chassis with some overly hefty CNC machined front panel pieces, and an over-the-top example at that, which I probably shouldn't have picked.
 
In the context of average "high-end" components, I was merely refuting the comment that "up to 70% of the ultimate retail price of hi-end components is due to the cost of the cosmetics", although it certainly adds to the cost.

[avionic]

Hope this is legal:    http://www.audioholics.com/education/amplifier-technology/clone-amplifiers

The class D amps sound great,especially for a couple hundred bucks. You also get the knowledge and pride of building something on your own. As far as parts for assembly you can go as cheap and cheerful or as exotic as you want making your amp the way you want it.

[firedog]

The audioholics article links to this: http://www.hificritic.com/downloads/Class-D.pdf

which basically claims that ClassD amps, by definition, aren't even real hi-fi and can't sound good.

Interesting b/c lots of critics and experienced audiophiles have reacted to many of the recent examples saying how "surprised" they are and how "good" they sound. Shouldn't the "ear" test be more important than the "theory" test?

[jtwrace]

Shouldn't the "ear" test be more important than the "theory" test?

YES, but data is fun to look at.   

[Mariusz]

Guys
lets keep it on topic.
I certainly won't tolatate bashing other brands on this circle ( not that it happened but it might turn into a pig fight.  We do not want to do that. Unless you want this thread locked.  )

Thank you

Regards
Mariusz

[jtwrace]

Unless you want this thread locked.  )

Thank you

Regards
Mariusz

No sir!

[pjchappy]

I would love to see data on the on-topic Class-D modules. . .even though I would probably have no clue what most of it means. . .   


Paul

[mjosef]

Ummm...hope I am not seeing a sorta theme evolving here, where any dissenting views on the sonic quality of these modules are subject to ridicule and overbearing arm wrangling. That will be a shame since this thread is now over 35pages, however when something has come such a long way there may be the tendency to be over protective.
I have been offered one of these amp module for a home demo, and hope I can post whatever impressions I have compared to what I am currently using which is nothing fancy, a modified Adcom 555II.

The proof is always in the pudding, or tasting thereof.

[wushuliu]

Ummm...hope I am not seeing a sorta theme evolving here, where any dissenting views on the sonic quality of these modules are subject to ridicule and overbearing arm wrangling. That will be a shame since this thread is now over 35pages, however when something has come such a long way there may be the tendency to be over protective.
I have been offered one of these amp module for a home demo, and hope I can post whatever impressions I have compared to what I am currently using which is nothing fancy, a modified Adcom 555II.

The proof is always in the pudding, or tasting thereof.

Actually I think we just spent more time on retail manufacturing/cost ratios than on any dissent. There's a lull right now so before the mob gets angry you'd better get on that demo right quick! And it better say what I want it to say or  !

I suggest 80 proof in that pudding.

[jtwrace]

I gotta say that I use 300 wpc Class A mono blocks as my reference amp.  These Class D amps are really good. 

Like anything in this hobby, it comes down to YOUR preference.  In my opinion, you can't go wrong with these amps. 

Yes, they're that good!  Again, starting at $175.   

[pjchappy]

Are there any published specs on these modules that I may have overlooked, other than the brief power ratings, etc. on the site?  I've got a kit ready to go. . .again, I'm just curious.

Paul

[konut]

The audioholics article links to this: http://www.hificritic.com/downloads/Class-D.pdf

which basically claims that ClassD amps, by definition, aren't even real hi-fi and can't sound good.

Interesting b/c lots of critics and experienced audiophiles have reacted to many of the recent examples saying how "surprised" they are and how "good" they sound. Shouldn't the "ear" test be more important than the "theory" test?

This article was dated 2008. Most, if not all, of the objections raised have been overcome. I cannot speak directly to the amp boards that are the subject of this thread, suffice to say that the Hifi Critic article paints with so broad a brush as to be almost totally useless when discussing specific designs subsequent to its publication.

[wushuliu]

Are there any published specs on these modules that I may have overlooked, other than the brief power ratings, etc. on the site?  I've got a kit ready to go. . .again, I'm just curious.

Paul

I believe links have already been provided for the IR-based amps. Since these amps are basically equivalent to the evaluation boards, that should be a source for measurement data.

I imagine it's the same for the TA5630 boards (correct me if I am wrong):

http://www.irf.com/technical-info/refdesigns/iraudamp7d.pdf

http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tas5630.pdf

[dewardh]

which basically claims that ClassD amps, by definition, aren't even real hi-fi and can't sound good.

Aren't these the same critics who said the 3886 wasn't "real hi-fi" (until someone put one in a $2000 box and it became "the best of the best" ? ? ?)

nothing fancy, a modified Adcom 555II.

Possibly amusing aside . . . I'm using gutted Adcom 535 II boxes (bought cheap with blown outputs or transformer fuses or whatever) to house my classD amps . . . and gutted 535 boxs (with 4 channels of output connectors already installed) for my 4 channel 3886 amps . . . and note that a 2535 box would work great for two of the 250x2 boards using the existing transformers and ps (with some added filter caps).

[wushuliu]

I hope some more folks try replacing the input caps as it's pretty easy. Should have taken pics but I forgot. Got too excited...

[Nick77]

I hope some more folks try replacing the input caps as it's pretty easy. Should have taken pics but I forgot. Got too excited...

What kind of results are you getting? Was that just some basic .22 film caps?

[Mariusz]

I hope some more folks try replacing the input caps as it's pretty easy. Should have taken pics but I forgot. Got too excited...

Maybe someone else did or is wiling to do that???

Thanks guys


Mariusz

[avionic]

I hope some more folks try replacing the input caps as it's pretty easy. Should have taken pics but I forgot. Got too excited...

Those things are tiny. Did you remove the old ones and if so how hard was it to get them off the board.

[pjchappy]

I believe links have already been provided for the IR-based amps. Since these amps are basically equivalent to the evaluation boards, that should be a source for measurement data.

I imagine it's the same for the TA5630 boards (correct me if I am wrong):

http://www.irf.com/technical-info/refdesigns/iraudamp7d.pdf

http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tas5630.pdf

Thanks!

From a technical standpoint, anyone have any concerns based on these specs?  I am just totally curious. 


Paul

[pjchappy]

Has anyone had a chance to compare this amp to one of the Peachtree Audio amps, the Nova or Decco 2?  I realize that everyone is comparing these to much more expensive units, but this seems to be to be a rational comparison since the both utilize class D amplification in a similar wattage and price range.

Thanks,
Ed

The Peachtree amps are A/B, not D.


Paul