JN - I appreciate the gentle pushback. But, I note, quizzically, "fanatic," "hype"? Perhaps no conscious intention to insult - but these are hardly neutral characterizations - one might characterize them as inflammatory. At a minimum, those words invite comment inasmuch as no specific quote is offered supporting the validity of these terms. The impetus of this thread, for those paying attention, has always been to persuade folks to TRY the new technology (for the cost of shipping). Period. Further, as the very first posting in this thread notes, yes, I was biased concerning GanFets. But I was biased against, not in favor of, the technology. Again, clearly stated in the first posting of this thread.
Thus, while it's obvious, also as I've noted several times, that musical preferences are subjective, I find comparisons of technology anything but misleading or ill-serving fellow audiophiles' best interests. I've detailed the equipment I own, my time in this pursuit, etc. I've given reasons for every claim I've made in this thread. I think we've seen in these posts not a single criticism of GanFets by those who have actually listened to them. Several here have purchased GanFet amps. Further, we have at least two designer/manufacturers (Mytek, Atmasphere, and there are others) who seem to now favor GanFets over other technologies even where at least one makes/sells tube gear.
Not certain why the "salesman bias" discussion inasmuch as no person on this thread has identified himself/herself as an audio salesperson selling GanFets. As previously noted, I have nothing to do with Class D Audio or Premium Audio. Also, I sense a misunderstanding when using the word "debate" concerning the circuit topology comparisons. The issue here is whether one is willing to fairly listen to a new technology for the cost of shipping? I "tout" GanFets over tubes because for me, and apparently others on this thread, GanFets are sufficiently pleasing to supplant tubes sonically and that's without any consideration of their other astonishing advantages over any other current circuit topology. If that's a "debate" then so be it. Would you find GanFets superior (however you subjectively evaluate them) to your current gear? Don't know. What I do know is that if you tried GanFets and didn't find'em superior the solution is easy - return'em. Just setting the record straight and truly not insulted. Hell, it's just a hobby albeit a passionate one. If one person, and I think we're already there, finds more listening pleasure with these small, inexpensive, and light revolutionary tools (and that's not hype - if challenged I'm happy to recount why GanFets constitute a revolution in music reproduction) then I've accomplished my goal.
Catluck,
First, thanks for the thorough and well-considered reply. I went back and forth as to whether I should use the terms you pointed out. I ended up sticking with them because, while there is some hyperbole in them, there is, as with most hyperbole, some truth, much as what I describe as hype regarding the GanFet amps no doubt has some truth in it. I’ll grant you that hype feels more pejorative than hyperbole, but hype is the child of hyperbole. Up to now, I stayed out of the discussion because, never having heard a GanFet amp in person, I felt I was in no position to offer an opinion. I only entered the fray after Atmasphere made the pronouncement that GanFet is likely to replace tubes, and that manufactures of tube amps who don’t recognize this will find themselves behind the eight ball (I’m paraphrasing, as I don’t have the post in front of me). Atmasphere makes great tube amps and now makes class D GanFet amps and has a literal vested interest in their commercial success. That doesn’t mean he isn’t absolutely sincere in his love of and belief in his product, but it does mean he has a very different sort of skin in the game than does, say, a user of his products or anyone whose living isn’t dependent on them. As for the fanatic reference, I meant it partly tongue in cheek, but also seriously, in that many, after discovering something new, whatever it might be, have a tendency to advocate passionately for that thing. After all, there’s a reason the saying exists. But, again, that doesn’t mean those people are insincere or even inaccurate, but the sheer degree of praise does cause in someone like me, perhaps cynically, a level of caution almost in direct proportion to the enthusiasm. The sheer momentum of unqualified approbation, regarding anything, always gives me an Invasion of the Body Snatchers vibe. This is no doubt as much, if not more, a comment on me as it is on them.
All of that said, you’re absolutely right (as you know) that in the end all you’ve done is say Hey, I love this, it’s awesome, here’s an opportunity for you to try it, too. I have no beef with that whatsoever, which why up to recently all I did was read with interest. As I said earlier, it’s only when the conversation spilled into pronouncements claiming superiority, made by someone with a commercial interest in the success of the product, however sincere he may be, that I felt impelled to raise the specter of bias claiming to be objectivity. Regarding the technology itself, I have nothing to object to, having heard it only through compressed YouTube videos. I’ve heard others I respect speak remarkably highly of GanFet technology. In fact, I almost bought one of Atma-Sphere’s class D amps, but, for no rational reason other than wanting to try them and having liked what I heard, I decided to go with my first tube amp instead. In the interest of fair play and to satisfy my genuine curiosity, I may give the GanFets a try and, who knows, maybe I’ll be a convert. Though it seems maybe not entirely ethical to try them if I have no real intention at the outset of buying them. What do you think?
Anyway, that’s why I decided to speak up and used the language I did. Was it justified? I’m not so sure. I feel like I’m working hard to convince myself, but I think what I’ve mostly done is talk myself into giving the GanFets a try.
