boomana Posted November 8, 2007 Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 So, this is coming out in a week. As I'm busy trying to learn about such things, I'm curious as to why someone would choose to build a Class D portable amp, or if it's such a good idea, why, with the explosion of portables, hasn't it been done more (I think Headroom has a Class D desktop, but I don't know of others)? http://www.i-qube.nl/index.php?id=18 EDIT: I'm thinking mainly in terms of sound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomana Posted November 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 the battery life should be very good. Okay, but battery choices are plentiful. My damn little Diablo has been going for a few days straight, and isn't the Tomahawk supposed to go for 5,000,000 hours on a couple AAA? Is there any sq advantage, or is this more about efficiency and novelty? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister X Posted November 8, 2007 Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 Maximum output power per channel from 20-20,000Hz: 160 mW_16 ohm 80 mW_32 ohm 12 mW_200 ohm Ouch.... makes me wonder why they bothered with a class D chip as well. Especially with 4 AAA batteries.... The case is pretty novel though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
granodemostasa Posted November 8, 2007 Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 it's cute... i'm sure someone out there will like it. at least it's novel... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elnero Posted November 8, 2007 Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 it's cute... i'm sure someone out there will like it. at least it's novel... $550.00 US (approx.) is pretty expensive for cute and novel. For a portable amp at that price I'd expect it to be borderline ground breaking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomana Posted November 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 So I get the whole high power, high efficiency thing, but forgetting battery life and some ooomph, what about sound? I'm mostly wondering why people haven't been making Class D portables since good battery life and power isn't a bad thing? Sorry for the noob questions, but I'm really curious. Are there disadvantages to sound, even if the power can drive Senns, for example? What do you lose by going that route? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n_maher Posted November 8, 2007 Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 I'd hardly call those specs high power, the mini3 puts out about 3x that much into 330ohm. I wonder how low the i-qube's output would be with a load like that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomana Posted November 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 I'd hardly call those specs high power, the mini3 puts out about 3x that much into 330ohm. I wonder how low the i-qube's output would be with a load like that? I guess I was referring to what I've been told as the advantages of Class D in general. So is there any point to this amp other that looking cute? I'm not interested in getting one, but just in why it was made that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Filburt Posted November 8, 2007 Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 I choose Class D because I am a _huge_ fan of switching noise, phase shift, and bizarre, complex distortion spectra. Those things really improve my listening experience and I could not go without them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n_maher Posted November 8, 2007 Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 I choose Class D because I am a _huge_ fan of switching noise, phase shift, and bizarre, complex distortion spectra. Those things really improve my listening experience and I could not go without them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philodox Posted November 8, 2007 Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 I choose Class D because I am a _huge_ fan of switching noise, phase shift, and bizarre, complex distortion spectra. Those things really improve my listening experience and I could not go without them. LOL, great post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hYdrociTy Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 FILBY IS BACK (>'-')><('-'<) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aerius Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 I choose Class D because I am a _huge_ fan of switching noise, phase shift, and bizarre, complex distortion spectra. Those things really improve my listening experience and I could not go without them. Well, in that case you'll really love SACD, and any CD player or DAC which uses a single-bit D/A converter chip. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Filburt Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 Well, in that case you'll really love SACD, and any CD player or DAC which uses a single-bit D/A converter chip. Of course! I also don't want to miss out on sweet, sweet quantization noise in the audio band Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icarium Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 Jesus SACD is flawed in that fashion? I probably can't even hear it, but I had no idea. I have some decent sounding SACDs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 Yeah, there's a lot of high-frequency hash on SACD output, but it's much higher in the case of DSD than it is in, for example, a filterless DAC at 16/44.1. The bright side is that it's more phase-correct, which is why SACD's are still so pleasant to listen to. That said, unless you've heard a filterless DAC, you'll never know which you prefer. Some people prefer filterless DACs even at 16/44.1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spritzer Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 There is a reason why DSD is converted over to 24bit PCM in many players. Still DSD is in its infancy while PCM is more then 60 years old Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 There is a reason why DSD is converted over to 24bit PCM in many players. I'm not sure what reason you're trying to imply here, but the reason most of them convert is to cut costs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spritzer Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 I'm not sure what reason you're trying to imply here, but the reason most of them convert is to cut costs. I wouldn't call a APL NWO3.0GO cheap and they do it for better performance. DSD will sound much better in 20 years time but now it's better to convert over to PCM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philodox Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 Oh yeah, well I convert DSD to PCM for fun! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 I wouldn't call a APL NWO3.0GO cheap and they do it for better performance. DSD will sound much better in 20 years time but now it's better to convert over to PCM. I humbly disagree. I know of at least two high-end upconverters that convert 16/44.1 PCM to DSD, and they're both considered desirable (Meitner, dCS). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spritzer Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 That's true but both have a vested interest in DSD (both are big in the pro sector) and neither can match the APL in engineering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepak Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 That's true but both have a vested interest in DSD (both are big in the pro sector) and neither can match the APL in engineering. Can you tell us a bit about the APL engineering? Because reading their forums, there isn't much technical info other than a whole lot of ass kissing (or audio masturbation). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 I'd be willing to bet that a single guy doing cd player mods isn't doing more engineering than meitner or dcs...but you're welcome to think otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepak Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 I'd be willing to bet that a single guy doing cd player mods isn't doing more engineering than meitner or dcs...but you're welcome to think otherwise. I'm not frowning on dcs or Emm Labs (and I agree with you). I'm actually really curious to hear about what goes into the APL players (given the relatively little technical information I've found on the web, other than hearing "it's the greatest digital player ever" ad nauseum), and if spritzer has some information I'd like to hear it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.