It has.
Sorry, WTF do you know about what I have heard and haven’t?? Mola Mola is not modern Class D? Purifi based amps are not modern? I am not sure I ever heard a tripath amp but plenty of ICE, Hypex, N-core, nuforce etc. Etc. Etc.
Oh, and a Shellac cylinder in many ways sounds more alive than modern recordings…ever actually heard one??
It is difficult to judge whether longer burn-in would significantly change the sound signature. I have listened to quite a few various class D amps, and I still prefer good SET amps. I had high hopes for Atma-sphere to be an exception outcompeting good triodes, but to me it wasn't. These are great monoblocks, but I still strongly prefer my SET. I will keep searching though...
The thing about any of the amps that use a module not designed by the company is application. You have to get the input buffer right and you have to get the power supply right. The fact that you hear so many variable comments about the products in the list above has a lot do with how they were applied.
We have a lot of feedback in this regard. You can find some of it on this thread. We did not expect that break-in would be much of a variable since the amp employs so much feedback, but in the end it turned out that break-in takes as long with the class D as it does with our tube products.
That's right. I don't think any manufacturer actually breaks stuff in! It takes 100s of hours.
Of course. But when we got the first version that sounded like music running, it didn't need breaking in to show that the project was worth pursuit.
@Atmasphere When you are testing a prototype, how do you know when you are hearing its full capability? For example, the designer of well-considered streamers has said that his products have further break-in during three month cycles for the first year.
I am a firm believer in burn in. If you have a standard it takes time to become acclimated to a new one.
Often you are not- but usually overarching that you find some fatal flaw in the prototype or else you move it to production...
I was watching Caelin with RobertH video. Cealin talks about metal, and in particular wire being crystalline and amorphous at the same time. That the molecule will shift as current goes through them.
You are right. Ralph’s new class-D amp sounds like his OTL tube designs only better. I became a fan of Ralph’s OTL designs because they are so incredibly transparent sounding. They only have one hi-quality blocking cap in the signal path. They don’t have the limits of an output transformer getting in the way between the amp and speaker. His designs are super wide bandwidth and relatively low distortion for a tube circuit with minimal feedback. 20kHz phase is within one degree of perfect making the highs open and extended sounding with the transient response quick and transparent. His class-D amp has been designed with the same mindset as his OTL tube amps. And the outcome can be heard. This class-D sounds like it came from the same mind as his OTL’s. Because it did.
...that part seemed a little "soft" to me. I should re-watch it, because amorphous is "sort-of" opposite of a chrystal structure, which has a geometric "definition" of its shape. But I believe those structures can change as current (or extreme pressure, heat) is applied. Not trying to refute this comment, just noting I found it a little vague. Maybe that particle/wave flow concept. On balance, the video was helpful re: their device, IMO.
It's always great when someone says I am right. I have not heard the amp, so I have no idea what it sounds like. As always, absent evidence to the contrary I take Ralph at his word. He says it is as good or better than his tube design, I take him at his word. It does beg a very serious question that I am too polite to pose.
