[mick wolfe]

Took the MiniGan 5 out and put back in a tube amp into my downstairs system and, well, the tube amp is staying.

Yes, I feel the Mini GaN 3 is quite good, especially here where I've found running XLR to XLR a plus. For some it might even be a revelation for its ability to drive more difficult loads and its strong bass presence. Yet when I've put either of my two tube amps back in system, it's game over.

[newzooreview]

Pass Labs is a given, Nelson has more knowledge of SS amps than anyone in this hobby. Experience and knowledge matter. Stick with the pros.

The MiniGaN 5 monoblocks (with WBT binding posts installed by Class D Audio) are very clearly better than my Pass Labs XA25 in my system through the Spatial Audio M3 Sapphires. The MiniGans removed some upper midrange grunge that was affecting vocals with the XA25, provided more texture and reach in the bass, and is provides more detail than the XA25 (and naturally so, not etched or hyped sounding).

I suspect that the running the MiniGaNs in a fully balanced system makes a difference, both in general and in moving from the XA25 in my system. My Holo May KTE DAC and Holo Serene preamp are fully balanced, as is the MiniGan 5.

I have never had a larger Pass amp in my system, so I wouldn't be surprised if a pair of their 60 watt or larger monoblocks with balanced inputs would match or improve on the MiniGan 5s. I've enjoyed hours of Nelson Pass's technical discussions on Youtube, and the company has been top notch to work with. The XA25 sounded very enjoyable in my system, the MiniGan 5 monoblocks simply sound better.

Regarding Bel Canto and others who make silicon-based Class D amps, it's apples and oranges: they have zero years of experience designing GaN-based amps.

[morganc]

If it's the preamp which is bringing the magic, what's the point of the MiniGaN?
If I get a fantastic tube preamp, don't I basically have my LTA Z40+ integrated with a bit more power?

For me it's the synergy.  I believe there's somehow great synergy between this amp, a good 6SN7 pre and the spatial speakers.  Correct me if I'm wrong but Tysons comments are using his GR Research speakers. 


I'd be interested to hear anyone using spatial speakers and this amp connected direct via digital
Minus a pre amp. 

[morganc]

It would also be interesting to hear musical choices of those who love this am and those who prefer others, all other variables equal.  In my work I'm an expert at isolating the variables contributing to a certain issue.  I personally listen mostly to female vocals like melody Gardot, Lana del Ray, Billie Eilish, and also rock like radiohead, Pink Floyd , as well as indie folk like devandra banhadt.  Modern R and B also sounds great to me via this system as does anything with an upright bass.

[Tyson]

It would also be interesting to hear musical choices of those who love this am and those who prefer others, all other variables equal.  In my work I'm an expert at isolating the variables contributing to a certain issue.  I personally listen mostly to female vocals like melody Gardot, Lana del Ray, Billie Eilish, and also rock like radiohead, Pink Floyd , as well as indie folk like devandra banhadt.  Modern R and B also sounds great to me via this system as does anything with an upright bass.

I listen to mostly classical, but with a wide range of other artists otherwise.  I like female vocals like Lana del Rey, Billie Eilish, Rhiannon Giddens, etc... For more pop/hip hop I like The Weeknd, BTS, Tyler the Creator, Kendrick Lamar, etc.... For Jazz I like older stuff like Louis Armstrong and Ella Fitzgerald.  For modern alternative music I like Radiohead, Tool, Tom Waits, Nine Inch Nails, Arca and Perfume Genius.  For classic rock I like Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin.

[mick wolfe]

Yes, and I'm as guilty as anyone. I'm not using Spatial's either. And of course, that was the original topic of this thread to begin with. 

[Daryl Zero]

The main kind of music I listen to is indie/alternative from 1970s up to current. I do listen to all types of music including jazz, electronic, country, rock, rap and classical although more selective on those.

[newzooreview]

I listen to a wide range of music. I don't listen to very much top 40 music from the last few years, but I listen to things that are as compressed or bass heavy. I definitely value the ability of an amp to resolve the details and reproduce the soundstage and timbre instruments in an orchestra. Tracking a stand-up bass in a jazz recording, naturally reproducing vocals, and having the speed to reproduce drums are also important. With that said, I switch gears to rock, pop, and electronic-oriented music pretty regularly.

I haven't run across anything that I preferred on the Pass amp. For something like a 50's Sinatra recording, an EL34-based amp might add some enjoyable glow but would not be nearly as versatile or even in performance as the MiniGans.

Merry Christmas to everyone!

[catluck]

This thread is indeed based upon the sound of the MiniGans with Sapphire M3's.  Didn't raise the specter of any other speaker.  I listen to jazz, 50's era through the present, almost entirely on the Sapphire/MiniGan/Freya+ system. As  previously noted, I've never heard the Sapphires sound so alive or real.  And, as I've noted, I'm a tube guy for the last 30 years.  Concerning the advice to stick with long-lived companies doing class D, like Bel Canto, I've owned the eRef 600 mono's. They were fabulous amps but IMO not the equal of the MiniGan5 monos which have greater clarity throughout the sonic spectrum and a sense of aliveness absent with the Bel Cantos.  And, of course, the MiniGans are 1/3 the price.  But, as I've always stated, I don't give a damn about price if the product isn't wholly musical. Who wants to own a less expensive product that sounds anything other than musical (whatever your tastes dictate as "musical")?  Not me.

I also disagree about the Freya+.  Again, I've owned AR SP9, SP11, BAT VK 51SE, and BAT VK52SE (just a sampling...). I have no sense that the presentation through the Freya is tied to the speakers.  Soundstaging, both laterally and height, are wholly satisfactory. No sense of the music tied to the speakers. I'm listening to Gonzalo Rubalcava/Charlie Haden at this moment and the presentation floats between the speaks about 4 1/2' high with no sense of speaks in the room.  The piano sits right between the speaks about 2 1/2' behind the speaks with a fat, muscular, tone-rich bass off to the right.  It could be that depth of soundstage is slightly truncated but I'd have to do a side-by-side comparison with another preamp and that's not going to happen anytime soon. In any event, it's not sufficient to compel me to seek another preamp.

If we consider a preamp's most important "objective" qualities, i.e., accurate channel matching (volume), low noise/distortion, gain, input impedance, and channel separation, well, again, I'll defer to John Atkinson's summary,

"With its very low levels of both noise and distortion, even with the tube stage active, the Schiit Freya + preamplifier's measured performance is superb..."

For those who've read Atkinson's reviews over the years, we can appreciate the significance of his words, i.e., he's sparing with accolades or the use of words like "superb."  I didn't want to "enjoy" the Freya because, well, how could a $1,000 preamp outperform the far more expensive units I've owned?  I've got to spend way more $$ to get the performance I'm hungering for...  don't I? Well, the only thing I can say is that my usual behavior, over the last 40 years, is that after a month or three, I'll start thinking about upgrading when components aren't "doing it" for me. Not only is that not happening, it's still the case that I can't wait to get out of bed to go listen to music.  I recognize that might not be the case for anyone else... I'm just grateful it's the case for me.


It's now 10 minutes after I wrote the above. Listening to Stan Getz, "Award Winner."  Marveling at the pitch/detail of the hi-hat.  Really sounds like a hi-hat.  For those who know, Getz's sax can often present as lacking texture. But with this system, the his leading edge has some bite. Finally, snare drum actually has a sense of snares under the bottom skin... snap, aliveness.  None of this was present to the same degree with any tubes or SS I've previously used.

[Mr. Big]

The MiniGaN 5 monoblocks (with WBT binding posts installed by Class D Audio) are very clearly better than my Pass Labs XA25 in my system through the Spatial Audio M3 Sapphires. The MiniGans removed some upper midrange grunge that was affecting vocals with the XA25, provided more texture and reach in the bass, and is provides more detail than the XA25 (and naturally so, not etched or hyped sounding).

I suspect that the running the MiniGaNs in a fully balanced system makes a difference, both in general and in moving from the XA25 in my system. My Holo May KTE DAC and Holo Serene preamp are fully balanced, as is the MiniGan 5.

I have never had a larger Pass amp in my system, so I wouldn't be surprised if a pair of their 60 watt or larger monoblocks with balanced inputs would match or improve on the MiniGan 5s. I've enjoyed hours of Nelson Pass's technical discussions on Youtube, and the company has been top notch to work with. The XA25 sounded very enjoyable in my system, the MiniGan 5 monoblocks simply sound better.

Regarding Bel Canto and others who make silicon-based Class D amps, it's apples and oranges: they have zero years of experience designing GaN-based amps.

I would imagine that Bel Canto would use whatever would sound the best, why would they not, and for that matter any manufacture of real quality gear? I think they have no prejudice against any one technology or part used.

Going XLR all the way through a system from the front end to the amp is the way to go if your gear is designed for true balanced not just providing XLR inputs and outputs.  It is night and day better in some cases and I have compared the 2 a few times in my system with totally different gear over the many years, always right back to XLR cables throughout.

[catluck]

Bel Canto,  like most SS manufactures may well be investigating GaNfets.  Let's remember that this technology is of recent origin.  Few makers have any experience with GaNfets. And they are nothing like Mosfets. Which means traversing a learning curve and, potentially, bringing on new design talent. Further, it may mean obsoleting any current Mosfet technology the manufacturer sells (like all of Bel Canto's SS gear).  Significant considerations.

Totally agree that XLR is the way to go if you can. But I'm aware that many contend it makes little difference except in long cable runs.  Oh well....

[newzooreview]

I would imagine that Bel Canto would use whatever would sound the best, why would they not, and for that matter any manufacture of real quality gear?

 

Knowledge of amp design, the budget to apply that knowledge, the willingness to use parts that get the best out of a design, and judgment about what sounds good are just a few of the things that differ, often significantly, among the hundreds of companies selling amps.

"Buy whatever Bel Canto is selling at the moment" certainly simplifies things, I suppose. To each his own.

Have you compared the MiniGan5 to a current production Bel Canto amp, to test the hypothesis?

[Mr. Big]

Underwood Audio has been selling amps of Gallium Nitride used in their products for a good few years, so it's not something really that new, a lot of power that is very affordable, how any part is used is only part of the whole it how the parts are used and were in any circuit design. They are no end-all for any part, it is only one part of the overall design. If they are really good then others will start using them if they feel it makes a sonic improvement on their design. The power supply is the key to better sonics, and that costs money. You get what you pay for. Clearly, companies are using GaN as a buzzword. I have had Merell Element 114  and Peachtree newest in my system so to extremes in costs and both went back.

Here is the opinion of the Purifi team on GaN as discussed in an interview:


Bruno: Well, with the sort of audio performance we’re getting I’d say that we’re asymptotically approaching “perfect”. One could argue that we passed the point of diminishing returns a few years ago already. I’m not saying that a next step won’t have any audible benefits, but in the grander scheme of things, the margin is shrinking.

Lars: That’s if you stick to audio performance alone. Otherwise we wouldn’t have bothered going to class D to begin with. You don’t do that for audio quality. You do that to get better efficiency, make the amp smaller and yadda. And then you get a new set of problems to fix, such as what it sounds like. And then there’s reliability, manufacturability and so on. I wouldn’t say that GaN is going to be the answer to those things, and neither is upping the switching frequency.

Bruno: Well for a given efficiency you could probably increase the switching rate, but if I’m going to shell out as much for a pair of FETs as what you’d normally pay for the whole amp, I’d rather benefit from that in terms of higher efficiency. Of course, not everyone is able to make that choice. I’ve spent my career honing control loops, most audio designers haven’t and so have to rely on simpler control loops. In that case, increasing the switching frequency is definitely helpful to reduce distortion.

Lars: We’re as fanatic about audio quality as anyone else, but because we’ve got feedback down to a T now we’re not forced to resort to higher switching frequencies.

Bruno: If we need to be geeky and I guess that the folks who are going to read this interview can handle that -eh Thomas?- lets grab the specs for the FET in our 400W Eigentakt module and its closest GaN equivalent. So that’s the FDP42AN15A0 (OnSemi) on our left and the EPC2033 on our right. Rdson: 36mOhm vs 7mOhm. Clear win for GaN here.

Lars: It’s also got a higher current rating (24A vs 48A) so if we want to be fair we should be scaling by about 2:1

Bruno: Oh erm well, that’s still a minor win for GaN because after scaling it’d come up at 14mOhm. Gate charge is of course magnificently low (30nC vs 6nC after scaling) so driver losses would be low and you can turn them on fast. GaN also has zero Qrr so you can do that if you want. But the main thing that sticks in my throat here is output capacitance. Our good old FDP42, which is from 2002 mind you, has an output capacitance at 100V of 70pF whereas the EPC device puts in a whopping half nanofarad (or 250 puff after scaling). That means your idle losses will go up, or you will have to increase dead time to allow the output inductor to recover the extra stored energy at its leisure. And isn’t it just idle losses that more or less determine real-life power consumption in full? And if power consumption isn’t something to care about, why not just stick with class A…?

Lars: And high dead time combined with high switching frequency sounds even less attractive. That just increases open-loop distortion.

Bruno: In applications like motor controllers and high density SMPS GaN and SiC devices are a breakthrough, mind you. It’s just that audio is this weird application where average power is very low and where dead time actually affects performance.

Lars: And GaN is going to mature so this picture is bound to shift at some point. Just not now.

Bruno: True. On the other hand, silicon is doing the same. More recent devices are getting frightfully close to GaN. Sadly they only come in SMD packages that require fairly expensive methods to get the heat out. Like most GaN devices. It looks terribly ancient, but the good old TO220 package is still a neat compromise in terms of performance for the price.

Lars: It’s just a game of tradeoffs. The fact that we’re using normal parts, and the reason why we chose to do so doesn’t make for a sexy story. We all like to believe in a magic bullet but when you’re an engineer you have to make choices based on tangible grounds. So the sexy story we’re trying to push about Eigentakt is that we think it’s a bloody clever design.

[Desertpilot]

... And if power consumption isn’t something to care about, why not just stick with class A…?

Thank you for posting this interview.  I need a new amplifier for my front three X3s.  I am perfectly happy with my Parasound A52+ (class A A/B).  But, I have more speakers needing an amp.  The Parasound A31 is top of my list.  But, I've done a deep dive into this thread and others, looking at Class D.  I keep coming back to the Class A A/B Parasound.  As an aside, I installed 100 Amps of solar panels a few years ago (here in sunny Las Vegas).  Power consumption is well controlled.  Decision soon.

[catluck]

The Purifi team review posted still seems to admit "advantage GanFet." When was this interview conducted?  As has been noted too many times, it's the subjective evaluation, for each of us, that we ultimately base our buying decisions on. Regardless of the techo-babble recited, the MiniGans simply sound more alive than any Mosfet amp I've used with the M3's.  I'm listening to Art Pepper as I write these words.  He has never sounded so "in the room."  More truthful, pure, and direct than any Mosfet amp I've owned.  Bruno's products are typically higher priced.  When one can obtain performance superior to the BEST performing Mosfets for a fraction of their typical price, that needs to be considered. Power supply seems to be far less consequential in GanFet designs than claimed here.  That's obvious when one considers that the MiniGans offer several hundred watts @ 8 ohms and have NO heatsinks!  The old paradigm of enormous power supplies required for the best performance is simply no longer true and getting "untruer" everyday.   For those who prefer 25(?) lb amps and heavier, with 10(?) lbs of heatsink, giant 10lb(?) toroids, and a hulking chassis to support it all, have at it. Been there done that.

As to Underwood selling for a few years, perhaps. I don't know how long Walter has been selling these GanFet amps. I don't remember them being in his stable for all that long.  Regardless, he's a single store. Most manufacturers are just now starting to pay attention to GanFets. And contrary to Bruno's opinion, as I've posted previously, Michel Jurewicz (sp?) of Mytek, along with other designer/builders I've quoted in this thread, feel that GanFets will provide the most musical platform going forward. I can't help but wonder whether a designer's years of efforts in optimizing Mosfet circuits don't result in some prejudice against GanFets.  Maybe - maybe not. No matter.  We each get to bring the date of our choice to the party.  What a world.

[RonN5]

My sense is that on a theoretical basis, someone will figure out whether GanFet or Purifi has the advantage,,,, meanwhile for the rest of us it’s about execution and how it sounds in your system… which means you gotta try them to know for sure.

[lazbisme]

how it sounds in your system… which means you gotta try them to know for sure.


always the case

[musicdre]

we are living in a golden age of amplification when the debate is whether ganfet, purifi or ncore are best.  all seem very close in performance and deliver crazy good bang for the buck.  no need to spend a lot to get a state of the art amp.

yay!

[Mr. Big]

Really there is no one advantage over any design, those who buy into the low-priced Class D products will swear by them, and others who love tubes will swear by them folks who like solid state gear A and A/B love them. My joke is whatever we now own is the best until the next piece of gear comes along. I stop following hype and trends a long time ago because they will always be another and another and another, its called marketing creating a need for change, in the golden ERA it was oh if you think that sounded good wait till you hear our new upgrade version, Audio Research made a killing with their customers as soon as you brought say an SP6, update one was released, Mk1, then 2,3,4, etc. At some point, it turned off its customers.   

Buy what you like but look for a company with long experience, known build quality, service after the sale, and a product that holds resale value because until we retire from this hobby or get old and wiser we will change gear from time to time and have some value in what we sell helps to pay for the new piece of gear to me that matters and over the many years I own gear that I never could of without having help in resale of my gear, unlimited funds I have not. In 40 years I never heard any change that was night and day better, different perspective of the sound yes, perhaps more authority in the bass, more relaxed midrange, more highs, and less bass, etc. Speakers yes, they can really give you more and better. Hearing Quad ESL57 was jaw-dropping never had I sat there transfixed, music just flowed in tone, color, and dynamics of each instrument, and many speakers today cannot accomplish that at 20K and up, they play louder, but that is not the same as presenting the performance as on the recordings,

Class D very clean and fast is the general trait. Could be what will be purchased by the newer audio buyer at some point, mass made stiff will go that way for sure, it is cheap to make, Emotiva went that way years ago, with lots of power on the cheap, plus lightweight. The Best amp used a 52lb transformer, class d module with power supply weight in a 5lbs. Same power, but a different sound, so they market power, vs. price and less weight. So a really good thing for that buyer. Some say that PS Audio and others do nothing more than buy the class modules and put them in a case, well that is not true they may buy the Purfi, Hyperx, and ICE, but they design their own circuits and power supplies around, Jeff Rowland as his own designers for his class D gear. If anyone does that it would be the mom-and-pop companies, not the big boys thus the price difference. But it is good to have affordable gear. Even Digital Amplifier Company until Tommy passed built his own power supplies and circuits his good stuff was not cheap and for a good reason, it costs to build them right. But he had cheap ones also.   

Tubes imaging, midrange, and nice highs, good mid-bass, and bass, 3D feel with good tube gear that sounds like tube gear, not the tube gear that tries to sound like SS. I grew up with tubes, my learning was with tubes and my ear education was with tubes and great recordings. But I use SS today. No hassles with tubes changing, and for me tube rolling, drove me nuts...smile!

Solid State has deep bass, good midrange, and extended highs, Imaging is good but not as dimensional as tubes, can sound drier and at times by design very relaxed and more liquid, all depending on its design. Jeff Rowland Pass, Mark Levinson, and Krell all advanced what SS could sound like and beat tubes in some ways but the 2 shall never meet and that is due to how both reproduce the signals.

I have found power cords that do much of the same as changing say the amp, so I own several good ones of different brands and models, if I want my amp to change I swap cords till I feel that is the best match for that amp, if I buy another amp I go through my power cords again to find the best match. If you have a good system anything you add to it you will hear a change no matter what you use, try 4 firm apples under say your DAC or preamp it will sound different the same as with any tweek you can buy, the sound does change, that is a given. Power cords impact the power supply of our gear and to me, they are so valuable. Don't change gear change your power cords.

[Early B.]

Geez, Big, that was a mouthful...

Bottom line -- Class D is Class D. There's nothing revolutionary about 'em (I thought so until I replaced my Purifi amp with a tube amp ). The Class D technologies all impart the same sonic characteristics. Plus, you need to dump a ton more money into a Class D design to get them to sound high-end. The same is true for any other amp type.