Gainclones vs. T amp variations

rajacat · « **on:** 24 Apr 2006, 08:00 pm »

Opinions please. Which have the better overall sound quality, Gainclones or the various class T amps. Is there a distinctive difference in sound quality?

_scotty_ · « **Reply #1 on:** 24 Apr 2006, 11:52 pm »

The best versions of each technology will give a large transparent window into the soundstage with good dynamics. The T-amp may sound a little lean but it should recreate a bigger sense of the space that the recording took place in. The T-amp cannot drive low impedance loads and should be used within it's power limitations. A properly implemented Gain-clone can put out 60watt's into an 8ohm load and 120 watts into a 4 ohm load if it has an adequate power supply,which would consist of 10,000mfd Jensen 4 pole caps on the positive and negative power supply rails with Panasonic FM caps for local decoupling, with a 330watt transformer. Even with the aforementioned heroic power supply the amp must see a stable 4ohm load to deliver 120watts. If the speaker has a nasty impedance curve even if it is rated as an 8ohm load the amp may have it's current limiting protection activated and shutdown before it burns up.
My preference leans toward the gain clone for it's load driving versatility
and a more neutral presentation without crossing the edge into harmonic leaness. It is also has a fluidity of presentation that is missing from the T-amp's performance.
Scotty

Vinnie R. · « **Reply #2 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 12:19 am »

Quote from: rajacat

Opinions please. Which have the better overall sound quality, Gainclones or the various class T amps. Is there a distinctive difference in sound quality?

Hi rajacat,

Regarding T-Amps, there are quite a few chips that Tripath makes....all with different power output levels, number of channels, etc.
See: http://www.tripath.com/audio.htm

I've built Gainclones and various Tripath-based amps. Regarding your question about what offers better overall sound quality (gainclone vs Tripath), I'd say it all depends on implementation. I've heard very good sounding Gainclone units and Tripath amps, and very not-so-good sounding versions of these types of amps. Both Gainclones and Tripath amps, if well implemented (and tweaked!

) can give fantastic results.

Quote from: _scotty_

The T-amp cannot drive low impedance loads and should be used within it's power limitations.

Hi Scotty,

Tripath amps seem to work fine with 4-ohm loads, and they have some higher powered chips that can drive 2-ohm loads. Regarding "The T-Amp" I assume you are referring to The Sonic Impact T-Amp. It can drive 4-ohm speakers, but I agree that it should be used within its power limitations (just like any amp).

Rajacat,

There is a wealth of info on Gainclones if you search around here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?forumid=40

or simply so a search in google for "Gainclone."

Best,

_scotty_ · « **Reply #3 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 12:49 am »

For my own system I use a custom Tripath amp with 20,000mfd of Jensen 4poles per rail and a 500watt bifilar wound E-core transformer. I hear the slight loss of mid-range liquidity compared to the best analogue amps
when direct comparisions are made but I like the dynamics and bass definition the amp has as well as the huge circumambient space it recreates.
Most amplifiers will not surround you with space, they seem to stop half way
down the sidewall of the room. The Gainclones have this limitation and that is about my major gripe with them. They are fantastic in the first half of the room but quit about in the middle.
Scotty

rajacat · « **Reply #4 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 05:24 am »

Quote from: _scotty_

The best versions of each technology will give a large transparent window into the soundstage with good dynamics. The T-amp may sound a little lean but it should recreate a bigger sense of the space that the recording took place in. The T-amp cannot drive low impedance loads and should be used within it's power limitations. A properly implemented Gain-clone can put out 60watt's into an 8ohm load and 120 watts into a 4 ohm load if it has an adequate power supply,which would consist of 10,000mfd Jensen 4 pol ...

Hi Scotty,

Thanks for the detailed reply. My speakers are moderately efficient (90 db) and I want to be sure that they won't be starved for power so a single regular T-amp might not be sufficient. I recently sold my Panasonic XR55 because, for some reason, I found it to be fatiguing to listen to for extended periods of time. I am now using my old Pioneer VSX-D498 AVR as the amp and a just purchased, slightly used Mapletree Line 3 SE multi-channel preamp.

Computer>Squeezebox 3 (unmodded)> MHDT Lab NOS DAC>Mapletree Line 3 pre> Pioneer AVR> Ascend 340SE's.

The tube pre and the analog Pioneer mellowed the sound and I now want to upgrade the amp but not go to an all tube system. The pre has enough outputs to run a pair of monoblocks, maybe a couple of gainclones or T-amp variations, and a subwoofer. I figure that the tube preamp would take the edge off whatever solid state amp I settle on.

Raja

rajacat · « **Reply #5 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 06:09 am »

Quote from: Vinnie R.

Hi Scotty,

Tripath amps seem to work fine with 4-ohm loads, and they have some higher powered chips that can drive 2-ohm loads. Regarding "The T-

Hi Vinnie,

I didn't realize the Tripath type chip was manufactured in so many powers.

Thanks for the reply.

Raja

rajacat · « **Reply #6 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 06:23 am »

Most amplifiers will not surround you with space, they seem to stop half way
down the sidewall of the room. The Gainclones have this limitation and t ...[/quote]>>

Scotty,

With my basic system it seemed that the tube preamp/Pioneer created a more engulfing sound space than the XR55.

Regards,

Raja

mcgsxr · « **Reply #7 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 12:20 pm »

Tough for me to suggest which will work best for you, but I have played with a broad number of digital and SS amps of late.

In the last 2 years, I have had in my system:

Stock Teac A-700LP - tripath
2 different modded Teac A-700LP - tripath
Panny XR-25
Panny XR-55
Custom Gainclone
JVC ES-1 receiver
JVC EX-A1 executive unit

I still own the Panny XR-25, JVC EX-A1, and custom gainclone...

For me, it really depended on the speakers, which amps sounded best. The Tripaths, both stock and modded, were clean, detailed, and bass control freaks with certain speakers, but with my recent OB Visatons, the synergy just disappeared.

The gainclone seems really close to perfect, but for my OB speakers, they lack some mid bass. It is a dual mono LM3875 amp, with built in passive volume controls - the treble is great, the mids are great, but on my OB's, it just does not hit the mark for the bass. Using ANY of the RAW speakers I am presently auditioning (all around 85-86db efficient) it is by far my favourite amp...

The cream of the digital crop for me, is the EX-A1, which is JVC's Hybrid Digital Technology, but it is an integrated, not a power amp - in fact, I don't know of any power amp using this tech...

I would look around for a used one of either, and just buy and try - playing in the used market, the hit is less nasty, and your opportunity to explore synergy in your own system, is what will guide you to the right solution.

Good luck in the hunt!

Vinnie R. · « **Reply #8 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 12:36 pm »

Quote from: mcgsxr

The cream of the digital crop for me, is the EX-A1, which is JVC's Hybrid Digital Technology, but it is an integrated, not a power amp - in fact, I don't know of any power amp using this tech... ...

Hi Mark,

The EX-A1 is a nice little all-in-one. Perhaps the best feature about it for use with the OB B200s is the bass boost. Since the OBs naturally will roll off the bass (cancellation of the front and back wave effecdt), using a tone control for the bass to bring it back up seems to make a whole lot of sense.

I found this out when using the bass boost with the Sharp EX111 with my B200 OBs. It is not so much that the OB B200s need a lot of power... they just need a way to flatten out the bass response. I know Richard has been playing with his OB B200s with a tube amp with bass tone control and has been getting really nice results.

Quote

For me, it really depended on the speakers, which amps sounded best.

I couldn't agree more!

Best,

JLM · « **Reply #9 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 12:50 pm »

I've owned stock Teac A-L700P (remarkable for the money), stock Clari-T (much better detail, but turned my 90 dB/w/m speakers from hard hitting linebackers to polite dinner guests), fully modded Clari-T (detail was further improved), and Channel Island Audio VMB-1 40 watt monoblocks (got the punch back, even more detail, and vastly improved imaging).

Note that I have very clean power (underground service with our own transformer, new house, new appliances, dedicated circuit to each cryo'd hospital grade Hubbell audio receptacle) with no conditioning, so I've only a small advantage using batteries in the amps and none elsewhere.

This question can also be answered by looking at Channel Island Audio as they have replaced $1000/pair chip based 40 watt monoblocks with $1600/pair digital 100 watt monoblocks. And their 200 watt digital monoblocks are even more respected.

Naturally satisfaction correlated with pricing.

albee · « **Reply #10 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 01:14 pm »

I have used the Sonic Impact (owned four), a 20 watt Tripath eval board, a Blaupunkt monster Tripath car amp, and, now, a Karmer 903 Class D integrated. The Kramer smokes all of the above. Fast, smooth, extended highs, dynamic bass but only 10 watts @ 4ohms-plenty for my Klipsch Reference speakers.

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=25507

ohenry · « **Reply #11 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 02:01 pm »

I’ve played around with quite a few amp3’s (41Hz)and evaluation boards, etc. over the past several years. I recently completed an Audiosector LM3875 chip amp that has premium parts and hefty power supplies (monos in one chassis). I find that the Audiosector amp has that great detail resolving ability of the t-amps, but is smoother and has better tonal balance to my ears. The midrange presentation is more to my liking and the amp lacks HF stridency that was evident in my t-amps. So, I give the nod to the chip amp over my t-amp experiences. But the gain clone is a little more than twice as costly as my tweakiest t-amp and doesn’t have that battery silence.

It is all about implementation as Vinnie wisely said, so my comments shouldn't be construed as a broad proclamation of superiority. It’ll be interesting to see if Vinnie’s new 30 watter turns similarly powered King Klones into Bozo the Clones…

nodiak · « **Reply #12 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 03:06 pm »

I like the LM 3875 gainclone quite a bit , especially with tube pre. Have used 6922 linestage, MiniMax pre, and 6SL7 tube buffer. I could see different people liking either one, but the octal 6SL7 is my favorite (I almost bought the Line 3 se , hope it works out for you). The octal is more solid, less airy and dispersed, and blends with the clarity of the gc to give it good gravity and soul, with plenty of detail and great instrument seperation. The music still floats, just has better form to me. A really strong and able combo imo. I know it's all down to tastes. Scotty's comment about not filling room is interesting, my system might do that, but I'm just used to it, need a good t amp for comparison.
I haven't heard a good tripath amp, have only had SI and Teac stock which were not in the game for me after I got gc. Have the JVC EX-A1 and like it alot (a keeper for ht) but the gc/tube pre combo is just more everything to my tastes. The JVC is very pleasing and real quality sounding.
Have you checked diyAudio? Good discussions in Chip amp and Class D forums. And look at it's Market Place>Trading Post - I just bought an assembled LM3886 gc with toroid for $100, only needs case and hardware.
All these things are inexpensive enough to try, and will sell if you decide against.
Adding a sub alone would really change things.
Don

rajacat · « **Reply #13 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 05:25 pm »

Quote from: nodiak

I like the LM 3875 gainclone quite a bit , especially with tube pre. Have used 6922 linestage, MiniMax pre, and 6SL7 tube buffer. I could see different people liking either one, but the octal 6SL7 is my favorite (I almost bought the Line 3 se , hope it works out for you). The octal is more solid, less airy and dispersed, and blends with the clarity of the gc to give it good gravity and soul, with plenty of detail and great instrument separation. The music still floats, just has better form to me. A really s ...

Hi Nodiak,
So far the Mapletree has performed well but I haven't used it with any quality amps so my frame of reference is small. It had less that 100 hours on it so the Blackgates, etc. might still need more seasoning. I really like the option of using the third channel for a sub or,perhaps, twin subs sometime down the road. Presently, the Gainclones seem to my best bet for my particular system. The Ascends 340SE's have a very flat freq. response, much like studio monitors, and they react well to the influence of tubes....I think. I'm now rolling amps and will soon be rolling tubes. Even with the Costco Pioneer AVR my rig sounds pretty good but, of course, not good enough! I'm not sure why I didn't like the Panny XR55 with my speakers, there are so many variables involved, not the least is my listening room acoustical environment which definitely needs some tweaking.

Raja

miklorsmith · « **Reply #14 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 05:34 pm »

I had an Audio Zone AMP-1 running my 626r's and picked up a battery modded Teac. I decided I didn't need two mid-powered SS amps so I sold the AMP-1. The one-input/dual volume was a pain so I didn't do any A/Bing.

Well, the 626r's need warmth and the AMP-1 provided it. The Teac does not. The Teac is a nice amp and I'm not running out to replace it. But, sonically, the AMP-1 was a better match for these speakers.

Now, Zu Druids, which are slightly warm in balance, might get along famously with the Teac.

nodiak · « **Reply #15 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 05:39 pm »

A thought that might interest you. I emailed Dr. Lloyd about that 3a and he explained the center channel is summed from L and R ch's, and that the subout is the same. I asked if he could make the sub a stereo output just like the R and L above. He said it's easy and would do it, but shipping costs are ~ $60 roundtrip. Or if you have the skills you could do that , he will send you a schematic of it. You would then have 2 stereo outs and a mono (center ch or use for mono sub), more to play with. Otherwise Y cords off the L and R for stereo outs.
Actually, I suspect you could keep all the outputs just as they are, and put in another seperate stereo L and R output (off the current L and R). These new L and R outputs would go where those 2 screws are on each side of the subout. Then it's 2 stereo outs, 2 mono outs, kind of a 5.1.

Don

GHM · « **Reply #16 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 10:45 pm »

I've tried several digital amplifiers. All low to mid priced digital amplifiers. The Carver ZR 1600 was a brute of tripath power. My only gripes with it was noise and a slight softening of the transients. It lack that last bit of transparency sounding slightly warm to my ears.

The Flying Moles were probably the worst amplifiers I've had the pleasure of owning whether digital or not. Very hard sounding and glarey with my Omega Grande 8s. All the music sounded bleached and strident.

The ClariT stock model was a massive improvement on the Omegas. My only gripe was it ran out of steam in a few dynamic recordings and compressed the transients. It did have a very transparent sound that I really loved.

The Panasonic XR25 was another transparent little beastie. Biggest complaint, it also had a glare on the top end and could be grainy. Over the long haul it could become fatiguing on the wrong speaker. It was no where near as refined as the ClariT.

Scott Nixon monoblocks. I got a chance to hear these, thanks to Lone wolf. These sound great when paired with a tubed preamp. Very organic but wet at the same time. The SN had just a tad of metallic stridence on top but not overly bad. They were the best of the lot out of everything mentioned so far. Not as quiet as the ClariT but with way more foundation and solidity.
There's also a refinement with these amplifiers, I didn't hear in the T amps.

The Audio Sector amplifier which is also a gainclone. Sounds very similar to the Scott Nixon monos. With the addition of the BG N caps. The sound is a tad more lush or tube like. The stridence I noticed with the SN doesn't exist with these amplifiers. The Audio Sector is also quieter than the Scott Nixon Monos.

Both the SN and Audio Sector are very fast ,detailed and dynamic. Bass wasn't a problem with either as the speakers easily drop into the 20Hz range.

For me the the nod goes to the Scott Nixon and the Audio Sector amplifier of all the amplifiers mentioned.

I have a custom made Battery powered 30 wpc Tripath that was started early last year. I just haven't had it completed yet. Hopefully I'll get this thing finished so I can compare it to my AS amplifier.

I was just chatting with an owner of the same Audio Sector integrated yesterday. He had Peter Daniels to make his usable on batteries and AC. So he has the best of both worlds when he wants it.

lonewolfny42 · « **Reply #17 on:** 26 Apr 2006, 05:46 am »

Hello Gymane,

Chris[/list:u]Nice...your system with

photo's.......

GHM · « **Reply #18 on:** 26 Apr 2006, 08:32 am »

Hey Chris it sounds like a plan. We could just swap if you like. I'll send you the Audio Sector and you send me the Teac after you do a comparison. Since you were so gracious... I'm more than happy to return the favor. If it weren't for you I may have passed the gain clones up.

The sound of the Audio Sector is stuck in my head . I wouldn't need both here to hear the difference between the two amps. Let me know and I'll pack it up and ship it to you.

KT · « **Reply #19 on:** 26 Apr 2006, 12:41 pm »

This is a good discussion.

After the recent frenzy of interest in Class-D and Class-T, I'm glad to see that the Gaincard/Gainclone amps are still a top choice.

I have the 47 Labs Gaincard, a couple of modded SI T-Amps, and the DIY Paradise Charlize with upgraded BG-N input caps, all of which I used with a tube preamp.

Overall, I think the Gaincard has the most soul. The modded SIs are very fast, detailed, and Hi-Rez, maybe to a fault. The Charlize lies somewhere in between.

In my system, the modded SIs are initially very engaging but are ultimately fatiguing because they emphasize the high-rez and speed thing too much. This same amp sounds amazing on my brother's system, however, which uses modded Klipsch Heresies and an Adcom GFP-565 pre. In this system, the balance is great and the compression drivers really take well to the modded SI. The sound is tight and high-rez, but the effect with the Klipschs is focused, fast, and energetic sound with great bounce and recovery. It doesn't come off as too high-rez in this case.

The Gaincard has the fast, smooth quality of a good chipamp, but it doesn't bloom enough on its own for my taste. With a good tube pre, however, it's my top choice between the amps being discussed.

The Charlize is detailed, but doesn't over emphasize the high-rez like the modded SI does. It falls somewhere in between. In my system, it's a close second.

I haven't tried the Hypex or Ice amps, but I hear those can be really good, too.

Best,
KT