[richidoo]

The new Absolute Sound issue (Nov) has discussion of various Class-D amps, modules, theory, opinions, etc. Most of it is retail mag fluff, but some points were interesting, including the reviews of some amps.

Dan D'Agostino's incredibly closed-minded comments about anything class D were pretty lame considering what he wrote in the accompanying BIO about himself and Krell, which would otherwise lead you to believe he is a visionary innovator. I wonder how his young blood designers feel about his attitude towards class D technology. I wonder if their is any truly visionary young blood happlily working in that design office. I don't see many reviews of Krell equipment these days. Considering the broad range of products that is weird.

Putzey's comments on the other hand were all constructive, informative and intelligent, actually sticking to the question asked of him. But he did not accept D'Agostinos negativity and broad sweeping criticism of the technology and retorted with a few good jabs. Rowland didn't come across too class-D savvy either, just more of a tweaker.

What was most surprising to me in the whole TAS expose were the reviews of 7 different class-D amplifiers. While I am by no means a TAS devotee, I do subscribe for the rare instance when they publish something that would be interesting to me, and this issue hit the mark for me. But the consistent and overall impression of almost ALL of the reviewed class-D amplifiers was that their high frequencies in general, AS A CLASS of design, are not up to the best tube and linear designs. I have heard this over and over so many times and experienced it myself when auditioning NuForce Ref9SE. Considering the prices of many of these class D amps, missing the top octave is a problem.

In particular the CIA D-200 was clobbered (IMO) for being too polite and thin with highs rolled off smoothly, while others fared worse criticism of the highs. In this forum there have been discussions of the sound of the D200 and people seem to say they sound awesome. What gives? Is it just bias of owning the amps, or lack of reference to better high end amps, or are they really world class amps and Chris Martins and Neil Gader don't know what they're talking about? Based on their other pretty objective reviews, I think their opinions are worth considering. Reviewers on the CIA amps are all over the place - some love them, some don't. All of the TAS reviewers who auditioned D200 did not choose it as thier top choice and they shared the same critique, so I give 2 cents of value to that since there isn't much else to go on by way of objective reviews. Meanwhile TAS just gave CIA the Editor's Choice award, even while many of editors' staff disagree with that award as evidenced by the review of CIA's strongest product. The Editor's Choice doesn't do much for me when considering what other products got it and which didn't. Harley is a nice guy, but a long way behind the cutting edge with his listings. If Nuforce also got Editors Choice award, then every other amp award is meaningless. Even in the Editor's Choice award, the highs and transparency were mentioned as negatives!! Typical Robert Harley.

For the money, and according to specs on paper, seems CIA and UcD in general is a great bargain. Made in USA by a trustworthy company to very high quality standard, lower price than I could build the amp myself as stock with a nice case and UcD modules. But being accustomed to ribbon tweeters and Cary tube integrated amp, I don't want to go backwards. I don't want to lose the air magic of what I have now from 200Hz on up. Many of the adoring reviews say that the UcD amps sound as good as SETs, and the performance specs given on Hypex website don't imply that highs are rolled off, etc. If bandwidth is really almost flat to 35kHz with flat impedence to 20KHz then why these reviewers all saying the highs are rolled off and the thing sounds too polite? Seems crazy to think Dusty would modify the design in any way that would detract from the stock sound.

I know the CIA amps are not stock, and Stereophile's John Atkinson review states in disbelief that Dusty told him their is no output filter on the D100's. I have tried to talk to JA and found similar communication gap present in abundance, so not surprised there. Maybe this soft high end is Dusty's taste and, like McIntosh, still sells to listeners who prefer a polite sound? There are no objective reviews on stock UcD modules on the web, nor do I expect a review by a writer that I trust on DIYCable black box UcD amps which are stock. But it sure would be great to read a trusted reviewer's take on pure UcD sound, unadulterated by CIAudio or Kharma.

Notably absent from the November TAS shootout were the new BelCanto ICEpower amps which have received highest award from 6moons.com. If I were going to buy class D amps today, I would risk the money on those based on reviews by various writers at 6 moons whom I trust.

I hope to hear some CIA and other brand class D amps in Denver this month.
Rich

[zybar]

I found the highs on the D-200's to be extended and not rolled off.  I also didn't think the midrange was thin sounding in anyway.

Does it sound like a really good tube amp?  Nope.

But it did sound better than most ss amps I have heard.

Anyway, try to hear them for yourself.

George

[Charles Calkins]

I tend not to pay to much attention to reviewers that are employed by a magazine. The last honest magazine reviewer was Julian Hirsch (May God rest his soul). I pay more attention to my fellow audiocircle friends who buy audio products, live with and listen to them and finally give us their opinion of what they like and sometimes dislike about a product. Magazine reviewers seem to be on a fast merry-go-round. I don't understand how they can evaluate an audio product in the limited time they have.
I don't know anything about all the class D amps but I do know that the Ciaudio D-200 amps are the best amps I've owned.

                          Cheers
                          Charlie

[denjo]

Charlie
Absolutely agree with your post! There will always be doubting Thomas' and cynical critics with new technology who feel uncomfortable accepting something that is "different" or unconventional. Don't get me wrong - I love SETs and have heard some great SS gear, but I think the amplifier of the future is going to be class D amplification and developments in that technology. It would be interesting to read this "confusing review" in 5 years, 10 years time! Only time will tell!
My Dad owns a pair of Krell 650FB monos but I still feel that my D200s can give the Krells a good run for the money. Mine are much "cooler" and sound musical!

Dennis

[mfsoa]

I haven't seen the review, but does TAS offer non class-D alternatives, in the price range of the D-200s, that they feel are better? I have no doubt that some people can offer choices that they like better, and I have no problem with that.

But to me the crucial question is - What do you get for your dollar?

I'm a happy D200 owner, but don't really have anything to compare them to since I have done almost no equipment swapping in my aphile life (had an Aragon 2002, original, for a looong time prior to the CIAs).

Yet I still feel that I got a good product for a fair price - Isn't that the goal?

If TAS is comparing to cost-no object space heaters and the 200s come up short, I have no problem with that either.

[zybar]

I compared the D-200's to the McCormack DNA-500 and BAT VK-600SE.

Both amps cost multiples of the D-200's.

I basically felt the D-200 was the equal of the DNA-500, but was bettered by the BAT.

No shame in either as both the DNA-500 and VK-600SE are widely lauded as two of the better ss amps on the market.

I listened to the NuForce 9's and didn't think they were the equal in any area of the D-200's.

While I haven't heard everything out there, I am pretty confident in saying that the D-200's won't be outclassed in their immediate price range or even above it.

George

[95bcwh]

Charlie
Absolutely agree with your post! There will always be doubting Thomas' and cynical critics with new technology who feel uncomfortable accepting something that is "different" or unconventional. Don't get me wrong - I love SETs and have heard some great SS gear, but I think the amplifier of the future is going to be class D amplification and developments in that technology. It would be interesting to read this "confusing review" in 5 years, 10 years time! Only time will tell!
My Dad owns a pair of Krell 650FB monos but I still feel that my D200s can give the Krells a good run for the money. Mine are much "cooler" and sound musical!

Dennis

What? you mean your dad has a $24000 Krell FPB 650??? 

[CIAudio]

Reviews are almost always confusing, and should never be the reason you buy something. When we send something to a reviewer, it's to get exposure and let people know we're out there. We've received some great reviews and one mediocre one, but what makes our business tick are the happy customers, who tell their friends, have audio buddies over for a listen, etc,

As for TAS, they had several writers try the D-200's, some loved em some didn't. Apparently there were enough of them to feel it deserved and Editors' Choice Award (one of two amps in category).

Most reviewers have a reference system that they put together, mixing, matching, tweaking, until they get what they're after...then they substitute review pieces for analysis. This is really not ideal for judging any component, but they are trying their best to give you their impression, based on what they like and whats important to them.

Being the first item we ever sent to TAS for review, I felt in an awkward position when I was approached for advertising before the review came out, but I stuck to my guns and told them we do not advertise. I
doubt this has any effect on the review, but we surely get no favoritism either.

So, use reviews to get your basic info and to narrow down your choices, then get your hands on a few and try them out. What matters is what works in your system for you.

[denjo]

Great customer service - that's another good reason! Whether through a post in this forum or a private email, Dusty has always been very prompt and helpful! This gives me great confidence in a product that is already excellent!

When my Dad's Krell KRC-HR preamp PS went missing during a home move, I personally emailed Krell and asked them to help fabricate a replacement PS but was shocked to find that my emails went unanswered for a long while. Not even addressing the email to Mr Dan (and later, Mrs D'Agostino) made one bit of difference! After a long while, I received a reply from Krell (not from the head honcho or even someone in senior management) to say they cannot fabricate one because they no longer had the parts. I replied and requested for the circuit drawings so that I could try and get someone locally to fabricate the box. I received zero help. My Dad's preamp is now sitting purty on a shelf, collecting dust and doing little else! I cannot overemphasise the quality of good customer service and the conviction of standing by a product. Do you know what this lesson taught me? I was intending to follow my Dad's footsteps and to start with the entry level KAV300 integrated! I am really glad I stumbled upon Channel Islands and the D200s!

Dennis

[Charles Calkins]

Dennis:
You will also get outstanding service and very, very good advice from Frank Van Alstine.

                             Cheers
                              Charlie

[CIAudio]

many other good manufacturers on this forum in addition to Frank Van Alstine.

Dan Wright
Jim Hagerman
Kevin Haskins
Vinnie
Klaus

the list goes on...

smaller companies can do things the big boys can't 

[MaxCast]

Most reviewers have a reference system that they put together, mixing, matching, tweaking, until they get what they're after...then they substitute review pieces for analysis. This is really not ideal for judging any component, but they are trying their best to give you their impression, based on what they like and whats important to them.

That's kind of how we do it too.  Is there a better way?

[zybar]

That's kind of how we do it too.  Is there a better way?

Not sure...

That's why I haven't yet posted too much about the amps I have in house right now.  I am trying to spend enough time with each one so that it isn't just a few hours and a blast to the internet.

Reviewing gear (both professionally and to determine if a new piece should stay) is quite time consuming and an inexact science.

No absolutes, just a lot of opinions.

George

[CIAudio]

That's kind of how we do it too.  Is there a better way?

Sometimes when you change a component, your first impression is "wow, i like it!" because it brings something new. After a few weeks of living with it, you find it lacks in some areas where the previous shined. You can't just swap an amp and judge it heads up...the cables that worked great in the previous setup may not be the best choice for the new one...same with speaker placement, toe-in, etc.

Reviews cannot tell you what you'll like in your system, in your room.  Even if they have the same speakers, equipment, etc...your preferences may be much different.
A review can only help you narrow down the choices of what to try.

[Robert57]

This is a refreshing discussion. I also was disappointed with the quality of the reviews of the D-200's in the TAS review, and now have even less confidence in the reviewers' (and senior editors') criteria or judgement for what makes a great musical component. This latest profile of the D-200's was pretty much a reprinting of Chris Martens' equivocal review that appreared earlier this year, and I doubt the CIA's received much of a new hearing this time around. Martens and Gader seem to value transparency, ultimate detail in leading edge, dynamics and 3-D soundstage precision over realistic tone, shading, and a comprehensive refined musical presentation. That explains why Martens prefers the Nuforce 9's.

I think the TAS reviewers tended to fall into the trap of focusing  on micro hi-fi attributes, especially detail and transparancy, leading edge dymamics, and imaging/soundstaging precision, over cohesive tonal realism and musicality. Ultimate detail and transparency do not equate to musicality and long-term enjoyment, and probably tend to be rather fatiguing if not well balanced. I came away feeling the TAS crew is generally more concerned with the former dissected hi-fi values, rather than weighing properly the overall musical tonal qualities.

Jonathan Vallin in particular is such a snob, anything not costing at least $10K from a prestige make (preferably  MBL) doesn't get much serious consideration as a serious hi-end component. In fact, I don't think he even listened to the CIA D-200's in making his blanket indictment that all Class D amps have problems, particularly in missing the upper octave, and are not in the same league of the best A/B amps.  He and Wayne Garcia, however,  did praise the Karma 150 monos as best of the  7 Class D amps reviewed, saying they were the closest to being a fine amp "worthy of inclusion in a high-end system". Since the Karma's were designed by Putzeys, the designer of the Hypex and UcD modules while working at Philips, I assume they are a derivative of the UcD circuit used in the D-200's, but nothing meaningful was said of the Karma's technology except that it is a proprietary in-house design. I believe the Karma 150's have a switching power supply. Unfortunately, there was no direct direct comparison between the Karmas' and the CIA D-200's in the TAS review. In fact, there was very little attempt to compare and contrast what generalized sonic attributes could be gleaned between the ICE and UcD -based entries.

If you want a well built amp that sound like real music and is non-fatiguing, IMHO the CIA D-200's are excellent, and a terrific value. They were the best I heard after a quick comparison of Jeff Rowland's ICE and Nuforce at last year's RMAF. I also value our AC member's opinions a lot more than the TAS reviews and am very glad I bought the D-200's.

Rob

[richidoo]

Thanks to everyone for your advice. I will audition D200 and the new CIA amps and trust my own ears.

Thanks for the insight and detailed response Rob.

The whole concept of "good for the money" really bugs me. The reviewer should just do his job and characterize the product objectively. It is more important to me to know if the 2300 amp I am considering really does sound better than the 6000 one. Yes or No from a music listeners enjoyment factor perspective. The audio reviewer is not qualified to judge how a customer will perceive the value because that is a personal matter, different for every wallet and every taste. I enjoy looking for very high performance audio products that are fairly priced lower than their similar performing exotic ripoffs. But if the exotic had a meaningful performance edge I would consider buying that over the cheaper stuff. Reading all the code words in a popular magazine reviews to determine what they are really saying is an artform in itself and makes it more difficult to find products suited to needs and budget. I don't know how many times I have written to editor suggesting they read a copy of What Hifi to see exactly how to make an objective review and stand by it forever.

Will the new CIAudio 700W amps and passive preamp be at the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest? How about the D200 amps? I hope to see them there.

Thanks again everybody! This is a great forum!
Rich

[CIAudio]

unfortunately, we won't be exhibiting at the RMAF this year. The days of this years show conflict with our vacation/anniversary, so I'll be in Maui instead.

We will be exhibiting at the Venetian for CES in January, and also plan to do the Stereophile HE2007 show in New York next May.

[JEaton]

Maybe this is why magazines and reviewers so seldomly give bad reviews.  You raise a lot fewer complaints when you give everything a wonderfully glowing, positive review.  Owners of the gear get the reviewer validation that they seek and feel better about themselves.  Manufacturers proudly post the review on their web sites and in their marketing materials.  But pan a product and watch the sh*t-storm that follows.  It happens every time.

[studley]

Personally the only reviews that I would trust as  being entirely representative of the reviewer's true opinions are those that appear on TNT-Audio.  Those guys do it purely for love and there is no advertising and so no vested interests.

[bummrush]

I found it very strange why no Bel Canto in the mix also.i know theres only so much room,but they should havebeen in there.