Best of 2006, Golden Ear, Blue Moon Awards and more awards for Digital amps.

playntheblues · « **on:** 29 Nov 2006, 08:50 pm »

I have been completing trying a Digital amp. again, and have been trying to catch up on my reading

Absolute sound has the Channel Island D200 as the best Digital they have ever heard, 6moons has the Red Wine 30 as the best Digital they have ever heard and Nuforce has won the Gold Ear award and they say it is the amp. they have ever heard. Now I try to read these things and take it with a BOWL of salt

, do some listening in my system and come up with what I like best. But you have to start somewhere, all of these reviewers have compaired these amps to come up with there choices. You would think they could come up with a consenses at least a couple of them.

Anyway, with the new Dodd pre and a new Audio Logic DAC coming I was hoping that the tubes here would help eliminate the sterile sound that the older Digital amps. have had. It looks like it's down to the D200 and the Nuforce with the D200 a head by a nose. Are there any other GOOD contenders that I should be considering? Thanks, Guy

sts9fan · « **Reply #1 on:** 29 Nov 2006, 08:59 pm »

I don't think The absolute Sound rated the D200 that high. Not knocking it I have never heard one but I do have the issue and I think it ranked/reveiwed two or three of them better.

playntheblues · « **Reply #2 on:** 29 Nov 2006, 09:51 pm »

sts, I have have been mistaken but here is the quote from Absolute Sound "This UNRIVALED class-D amplifier is a hands down winner; and no, not just in the "for the money" category. It may well be the best sounding amplifier I've ever heard! No foolin'." But who knows I'm looking to see if there are any other contenders that I should be looking at.

mr_bill · « **Reply #3 on:** 29 Nov 2006, 09:53 pm »

Quote from: playntheblues on 29 Nov 2006, 09:51 pm

sts, I have have been mistaken but here is the quote from Absolute Sound "This UNRIVALED class-D amplifier is a hands down winner; and no, not just in the "for the money" category. It may well be the best sounding amplifier I've ever heard! No foolin'." But who knows I'm looking to see if there are any other contenders that I should be looking at.

What issue is that in - they weren't so kind in this last issue. They even were negative about the Nuforce amp that was their darling earlier in the year.

playntheblues · « **Reply #4 on:** 29 Nov 2006, 09:58 pm »

Issue number 22, from 2005

DARTH AUDIO · « **Reply #5 on:** 29 Nov 2006, 09:59 pm »

Why do you need class D amp?? Just get a damn good tube amp and enjoy the music.

Good Luck on your search,

Gary

jbtrio · « **Reply #6 on:** 29 Nov 2006, 10:10 pm »

I have the Spectron Musican3 and think it is a wonderful sounding amp it is very quite,detailed,grainless,the soundstage is both wide and deep and pinpoint imaging. The amp is very neutral (maybe to a fault)you can hear deep into the recording. The bass is tight and tuneful it has an effortless sound IMS and IMO.
I use a tube CDP to get a little texture and warmth in the midrange.

Joe

playntheblues · « **Reply #7 on:** 29 Nov 2006, 10:11 pm »

Gary, I have a tube pre and tube DAC so I wanted see if I could get more resolution from a class D amp but still have the tubes to buffer the sterile sound so to speak. It sounds good on paper but have to try it in my system to see if this is a good idea.

GHM · « **Reply #8 on:** 29 Nov 2006, 10:26 pm »

Quote from: playntheblues on 29 Nov 2006, 10:11 pm

Gary, I have a tube pre and tube DAC so I wanted see if I could get more resolution from a class D amp but still have the tubes to buffer the sterile sound so to speak. It sounds good on paper but have to try it in my system to see if this is a good idea.

Actually resolution starts at the source..then you work your way down through the other components. Do you mean more of a balanced sound?..This I can understand.

DARTH AUDIO · « **Reply #9 on:** 29 Nov 2006, 10:31 pm »

I also owned the Spectron Musician III and it is a VERY GOOD amp for class D. My tube monoblocs have the same deep bass and extended highs. But there was NO contest in the Midrange.

I just don't get why you would want to buy an amp that has, in your words "a sterile sound"? I have a tremendous amount of resolution from my tube amps. There's more to resolution and inner detail than just the amps. I bought a Rives PARC because I couldn't control the bass issues in my room. The un-controlled bass was taking away from my systems "Inner detail". Once I put the PARC into my system, the resolution and inner detail came out in spades. I'm hearing instruments and sounds that I never heard before. And some of these recordings I've been listening to for 20 to 30 years!! I just bought a Loricraft Record cleaner and HOLY SH_ _!! More detail and resolution. And this is with the same all tube system I've been listening to for almost 3 years. Just some food for thought.

WEEZ · « **Reply #10 on:** 29 Nov 2006, 10:49 pm »

..you might want to keep those tube mono blocks you've got for sale...at least until you've tried the class D amps.

playntheblues · « **Reply #11 on:** 29 Nov 2006, 10:52 pm »

I hear ya, I currently have SC 150 tube mono blocks that are outstanding and I also have a Moscode 300 which is a tube hybrid but I am experimenting with two sets of speakers right now (just for fun). I have a set of Duets which are open baffle speakers and I would like to try to tri-amp. them with an active xoer. I don't want to do this we SIX tube mono blocks or 4 tube mono and Class D for Bass (its just cheaper). Eventually I will own Danny R. new line arrays but best guess right now is end of first quarter of 07 before they will start shipping. So I started reading reviews and threads and a lot of what I was reading kept pointing me to Class D. Which cost per watt is still pretty good, no heat, don't take up much room and if they are sounding 1/2 as good as I have been reading I would pick up six monos and have some fun. I owned one of the very first Spectrons, the predecessor to your Spectron. I thought that amp. was VERY good but didn't have the bass, you would think they have gotten better and you always hear them compared to SET amps. While I understand that Class D won't sound as good as a SET amp. if they are getting close, this is a direction I would like to explore. What do you think?

zybar · « **Reply #12 on:** 29 Nov 2006, 11:35 pm »

I have owned or heard almost all of the major "digital" amps (Rowland, NuForce, CI Audio, Bel Canto, Audio Research, H20, Spectron, etc...) and NONE of them sounding like a SET amp!!! NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!

Whether any of the above would be preferred over a SET amp or a more conventional amp (ss or tube) is a whole different subject.

George

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #13 on:** 30 Nov 2006, 12:23 am »

Quote from: zybar on 29 Nov 2006, 11:35 pm

I have owned or heard almost all of the major "digital" amps (Rowland, NuForce, CI Audio, Bel Canto, Audio Research, H20, Spectron, etc...) and NONE of them sounding like a SET amp!!! NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!

Whether any of the above would be preferred over a SET amp or a more conventional amp (ss or tube) is a whole different subject.

George

Your right... they sound nothing like a Single ended trioide. They are two totally different beasties.

JoshK · « **Reply #14 on:** 30 Nov 2006, 12:24 am »

Well said George. I think digital amps provide a hell of a lot of performance for the money. You are hard pressed to find a better amp anywhere close to the $ spent (for reasonably priced ones that is). However, are they the ultimate? I'd say not, but much depends on what you consider the ultimate (synergy, tastes, etc, etc). I like the UcD amps a lot, but I have preferred other amps in my system more, typically those cost a lot more.

I know Channel Island does some things to the front end beyond the stock UcD implementation. I haven't heard theirs, so it could perform a bit above ones I have heard....I don't know.

I have many ideas still up my sleeve for playing with the UcD modules since they offer so much for so little. I even have napkin sketches of a differential amp stage with voltage gain to replace the dual opamp in the front end of the UcD. It will be tube based of course.

I'm researching whether the output stage in the UcD can have its gain lowered practically. The applications notes mention this as a possible improvement (if only theoretical). In which case it will become a Class D power buffer and all the voltage gain will come from the tube stage, which tubes are born to do. The idea is simply enough, but the devil is in the details.

zybar · « **Reply #15 on:** 30 Nov 2006, 12:31 am »

Quote from: JoshK on 30 Nov 2006, 12:24 am

Well said George. I think digital amps provide a hell of a lot of performance for the money. You are hard pressed to find a better amp anywhere close to the $ spent (for reasonably priced ones that is). However, are they the ultimate? I'd say not, but much depends on what you consider the ultimate (synergy, tastes, etc, etc). I like the UcD amps a lot, but I have preferred other amps in my system more, typically those cost a lot more.

I know Channel Island does some things to the front end beyond the stock UcD implementation. I haven't heard theirs, so it could perform a bit above ones I have heard....I don't know.

I have many ideas still up my sleeve for playing with the UcD modules since they offer so much for so little. I even have napkin sketches of a differential amp stage with voltage gain to replace the dual opamp in the front end of the UcD. It will be tube based of course.

I'm researching whether the output stage in the UcD can have its gain lowered practically. The applications notes mention this as a possible improvement (if only theoretical). In which case it will become a Class D power buffer and all the voltage gain will come from the tube stage, which tubes are born to do. The idea is simply enough, but the devil is in the details.

FWIW, my favorite out of all the amps I listed in my previous post was the CI Audio D-200's.

Why?

They simply did the best job out of the lot in producing music and making me want to sit and listen without picking things apart. It probably helped that there were no digital nasties, sterile sound, or unbalanced presentation to muck things up and distract me.

George

miklorsmith · « **Reply #16 on:** 30 Nov 2006, 12:45 am »

I will very soon have a pair of Red Wine Audio Signature 70's to contrast my Yamamoto A-08s. This seemingly ridiculous comparison will actually be quite instructive.

Despite the chasm in power output, I'm only using the main amp down to 65 hz and my speakers are efficient. The Yammie can run my speaks very well. So, I should be able to compare them primarily on sound quality without a power penalty.

Cost between the amp choices is fairly close.

My original plan was to sell the Yamamoto. I don't think that will be possible, as I've already chickened out once. My guess is that both will take up residence in Chez Miklorsmith.

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #17 on:** 30 Nov 2006, 01:11 am »

Quote from: JoshK on 30 Nov 2006, 12:24 am

Well said George. I think digital amps provide a hell of a lot of performance for the money. You are hard pressed to find a better amp anywhere close to the $ spent (for reasonably priced ones that is). However, are they the ultimate? I'd say not, but much depends on what you consider the ultimate (synergy, tastes, etc, etc). I like the UcD amps a lot, but I have preferred other amps in my system more, typically those cost a lot more.

I've found that using the regulated power supply on the input stage does improve both the ST & AD versions to my ears. Its not huge but its another step along the path.

JoshK · « **Reply #18 on:** 30 Nov 2006, 01:23 am »

Kevin,

I believe it. It makes a lot of sense. I have been meaning to try that out. I also have some cool discrete regulation circuits and variation on vanilla circuits too. I just got some LM4562's to try out too. And boy is SMD soldering a lot of fun.

My tube front end, existing only as a napkin sketch, is regulated.

gme109 · « **Reply #19 on:** 30 Nov 2006, 02:05 am »

Quote from: zybar on 30 Nov 2006, 12:31 am

Quote from: JoshK on 30 Nov 2006, 12:24 am
Well said George. I think digital amps provide a hell of a lot of performance for the money. You are hard pressed to find a better amp anywhere close to the $ spent (for reasonably priced ones that is). However, are they the ultimate? I'd say not, but much depends on what you consider the ultimate (synergy, tastes, etc, etc). I like the UcD amps a lot, but I have preferred other amps in my system more, typically those cost a lot more.

I know Channel Island does some things to the front end beyond the stock UcD implementation. I haven't heard theirs, so it could perform a bit above ones I have heard....I don't know.

I have many ideas still up my sleeve for playing with the UcD modules since they offer so much for so little. I even have napkin sketches of a differential amp stage with voltage gain to replace the dual opamp in the front end of the UcD. It will be tube based of course.

I'm researching whether the output stage in the UcD can have its gain lowered practically. The applications notes mention this as a possible improvement (if only theoretical). In which case it will become a Class D power buffer and all the voltage gain will come from the tube stage, which tubes are born to do. The idea is simply enough, but the devil is in the details.

FWIW, my favorite out of all the amps I listed in my previous post was the CI Audio D-200's.

Why?

They simply did the best job out of the lot in producing music and making me want to sit and listen without picking things apart. It probably helped that there were no digital nasties, sterile sound, or unbalanced presentation to muck things up and distract me.

George

George, which model Spectron did you have? I sold my Musician II and replaced it with the CI D200's, which sounded a lot better, in almost every area. I've been curious about the Musician III though, wondering if it would surpass the CI D200's?