Old school amp
06-09-2006, 02:15 PM
#112
0 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 34
Originally Posted by 03rejo
Wow, this has now gone beyond my field of knowledge.
Great to see it! I'd respond with something if I knew something about what we're talking about now... but forgetaboutit.
PAGE 12!! holy ...
Great to see it! I'd respond with something if I knew something about what we're talking about now... but forgetaboutit.
PAGE 12!! holy ...
The digital revolution is great BUT in sound ANALOGE is superior. Well, sound is analogue, we as humans are analogue. In other words if a singer is on stage, you are hearing them 100% in analogue. We speak in analogue so to be totally accurate a perfect analogue reproduction would be nessesary. If you could capture the analogue and reproduce it perfectly you have a perfect recording. Problem is, it's hard to do this.
A class-A amplifier could reproduce it very closely.
A class-D amplifier would reproduce it looking like the red waveform below. Choppy. Look at it vs the class A which is black.
This choppy digital signal is hard to distinguish by the human ear but the distortion is still there. Remember a speaker operates in analogue so it sees those red transitions as distortion and has a harder time reproducing them than they would a true analogue signal.
The benefit to digital is this. I can put digital signals on media and they won't degrade over time. Analoge will. I can modify digital signals. I can amplify a digital signal, decode it at the amplifier and have **** loss (other than what is inherant to the digital reproduction [similar to the red signal]) until I output to the speaker. I believe there are car amplifiers with internal decoders but you need an optical link to use it's abilities.
There are +'s and -'s to both but in car audio with the head unit doing the decoding the best amplifier IMO is class-A or AB for full range. They WILL reproduce what is there more accuratly than a class D will. It's the nature of the electronics and how they work.
06-09-2006, 02:28 PM
#113
0 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 34
Thought I would add this to the old school vs new school debate.
The old school BLADE amplifiers took class D technology and class AB technology and merged them. Called BASH.
Instead of turning on and off the transistors like the class D does (which causes the distortion) they used the class D circuitry to regulate the power to the class AB amplifier so that there was only ever enough power to drive the amplifier, no less and no more which made it almost as efficient as a class - D amplifier but with the smoothness and low distortion of the AB amplifier.
This technology is now patented by them. A company called Indigo (formerly Blade) who supplies the likes of Klipsh and other high end audio manufacturers.
When audiophiles say "it sounds grainy" or "it sounds harsh" alot of it has to do with the sub par digital reproduction, the bad decoding of the digital decoder or the way the amplifier reproduces the signal. Slew rate, dampning factor, THD all come into play here on the amplifier end and the bit rate on the decoding end are huge contributing factors. It's not just a wattage game. Audiophiles (people concerned with real SQ) refer to things as "natural sounding decoder" because they understand that they are hearing a digital reproduction but the decoder is doing a good job mimiking the analogue properties of the human voice.
The old school BLADE amplifiers took class D technology and class AB technology and merged them. Called BASH.
Instead of turning on and off the transistors like the class D does (which causes the distortion) they used the class D circuitry to regulate the power to the class AB amplifier so that there was only ever enough power to drive the amplifier, no less and no more which made it almost as efficient as a class - D amplifier but with the smoothness and low distortion of the AB amplifier.
This technology is now patented by them. A company called Indigo (formerly Blade) who supplies the likes of Klipsh and other high end audio manufacturers.
When audiophiles say "it sounds grainy" or "it sounds harsh" alot of it has to do with the sub par digital reproduction, the bad decoding of the digital decoder or the way the amplifier reproduces the signal. Slew rate, dampning factor, THD all come into play here on the amplifier end and the bit rate on the decoding end are huge contributing factors. It's not just a wattage game. Audiophiles (people concerned with real SQ) refer to things as "natural sounding decoder" because they understand that they are hearing a digital reproduction but the decoder is doing a good job mimiking the analogue properties of the human voice.
06-09-2006, 03:09 PM
#114
excellent information
Wow - what I don't know. LOL. All I know is combined from years of experience coming together with my electronics servicing schooling and MECP books. I guess I never really put thought to it, other than I knew that digital has to chop up the signal alot vs. analoge, but most of that was learned when I was in school for the computers/electronics. It's really neat to see how that all works together. Now I see though how my eclipse deck sounds so much more full compared to my alpines - I always just thought it was higher quality (which it also is) rather than an almost wholly different method for the D/A converter. I am almost ready to install all my new parts, well old hcca parts which i just bought again, but I need to find a nice o-scope, because as we were talking before I trust my ears less than I trust equipment designed to fine tune it. Do you know where I could find a reasonably priced oscilloscope for tuning my system? Anything would be greatly appreciated.
later
later
06-09-2006, 04:29 PM
#115
0 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 34
Originally Posted by 03rejo
Wow - what I don't know. LOL. All I know is combined from years of experience coming together with my electronics servicing schooling and MECP books. I guess I never really put thought to it, other than I knew that digital has to chop up the signal alot vs. analoge, but most of that was learned when I was in school for the computers/electronics. It's really neat to see how that all works together. Now I see though how my eclipse deck sounds so much more full compared to my alpines - I always just thought it was higher quality (which it also is) rather than an almost wholly different method for the D/A converter. I am almost ready to install all my new parts, well old hcca parts which i just bought again, but I need to find a nice o-scope, because as we were talking before I trust my ears less than I trust equipment designed to fine tune it. Do you know where I could find a reasonably priced oscilloscope for tuning my system? Anything would be greatly appreciated.
later
later
Yeah as for the Eclipse it definatly has a good D/A converter and is a huge reason they sound better than most decks. Usually the higher the bitrate the smaller those little red steps get and the closer the signal looks like a true analogue signal.
This brings somethign to mind. Yamaha did something pretty cool with it's CD player about 10 years ago called S-bit technology which reshapes those D/A bumps into something smoother and more natural shaped. I took this from the Yamaha site.
"PRO-BIT DIGITAL TRANSLATION TECHNOLOGY*
Pro-Bit mimics the 20-bit resolution of professional recording. The higher bit rate produces less quantization noise during A/D conversion. The translator takes the 16-bit CD signal and adjusts it to more accurately reflect the signal of the recording process. The translated output goes to a 22-bit, 8X oversampling digital filter, a 22-bit to 18-bit noise shaper, and then to the S-Bit Plus DACs. This digital domain process delivers an audibly more natural sound.
S-BIT PLUS DIGITAL-TO-ANALOG CONVERSION*
Yamaha's S-bit Plus digital-to-analog conversion technology improves resolution, amplitude, and timing of the digital signal. In the CDC-775, four DACs are used -- two for each channel. The result is superb low level linearity, more realistic imaging and soundstaging, and better acoustic detail."
06-09-2006, 05:37 PM
#117
0 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 34
Originally Posted by islandphile
You wanna correct any errors u see?? Lol, u wanna be my teacher...lol
...and how old are u btw? Into car audio since when?
U come off like everyone else but u is dumb as sh*t
Maybe, just maybe if u showed a little respect 'cause u don't seem to know anything about the people in this thread.
U wanna gimme some lessons, huh?? Very amusing..
I will enlighten u a tiny bit: 1% THD in a car does not matter b/c u cant hear it just like u can't hear .0000001 % THD. Got it now? ur argument is not "real world" and is thus a moot point.
...and how old are u btw? Into car audio since when?
U come off like everyone else but u is dumb as sh*t
Maybe, just maybe if u showed a little respect 'cause u don't seem to know anything about the people in this thread.
U wanna gimme some lessons, huh?? Very amusing..
I will enlighten u a tiny bit: 1% THD in a car does not matter b/c u cant hear it just like u can't hear .0000001 % THD. Got it now? ur argument is not "real world" and is thus a moot point.
BTW I would appreciate more civil responses in the future. I may not have merit here but I do know a thing or 2 about amps and how they are designed. If I stepped on your toes, then deal with it. Just because you are an intelligent audio person here doesn't give you the right to tell newbs they are stupid or ignorant. Everybody should be given equal respect for thier opinions and what they feel. If you don't agree with it fine, but that doesn't give you a right to tell people off.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
