It’s been a few years since the release of our controversial article called “Attack of the Clone Processors”. Engineering a product from the ground up, especially one as complex as a switching amp, takes time and money with the end result often not being as good or cost effective as what can be bought off the shelf like these ICE modules from Bang & Olufsen. I can count the number of manufacturers producing their very own Class D designs and still have a finger left to point at all the copycats. Overall this seems to be a good design approach for manufacturers unwilling or unable to do their own developmental work if cost and full disclosure of performance is kept in check. It’s up to you the consumer to decide if paying a premium price for name brand, exotic accessory parts and cosmetics is worth the investment. Just don’t let anyone tell you that regardless of price, you are buying anything other than a clone amplifier, albeit a reasonably well engineered one.
Discuss "Attack of the Clone Amplifiers" here. Read the article.
Class D amplifiers seem appropriate for powering subwoofers.
But is it sufficient enough, even if they are very efficient, to be used as the main power for all the frequencies up to SACD limits?
Are they good enough for 96 or 192khz, as a faithful reproduction from certain audio formats?
Is the Pioneer Elite SC-07 (with class D, ICE amp modules) lacking when ask to deliver into 4ohm loads?
Bob
To answer the above questions I would recommend that you pay attention to the data sheets linked to theis article. Please pay close attention to the frequency response vs. phase graphs.
I have read this article a couple of times and I find myself still LMAO.
d.b.
__________________
I was an audiophile until I found out what they were doing in the recording studio.
I had an Emotiva DMR-1 which uses D2Audio Class D amps and I could barely tell a difference between it and the LPA-1. That would probably change if I hooked up terribly inefficient speakers and cranked them.
I've noticed that none of the ICE based amps that are sold in the US have had their finished products tested or certified to meet FCC Part 15B for unintenional radiators of EMI/RFI emissions. When I called Bel Canto the person I spoke with stated that they do meet this requirement but I've not seen the requisite information in their manuals. I understand that the modules are said to meet the requirements but that's the modules and not the finished product. Kind of like saying our power cords use UL listed materials but the actual cord was never submitted to testing. So, given that not too long ago, Behringer, who had imported a slew of products into the US which had CE listings but no FCC ones, was ordered to pay $1,000,000 in fines, aren't each and every manufacturer not only violating US law in this regard but also opening themselves up to fines? Thoughts?
...But I was thinking of getting FIVE of the UGLY Behringer EP4000 amps, Bridge them, and get 4,000 WATTS RMS @ 4 ohms, 20Hz-20kHz, & 1% THD Per Channel...
I agree that the manufacturers of clone amps should be more open in description of their products and that they use B&O modules. I must say that some manufacturers like Wyred 4 sound are already fairly open about it and they convey exactly the same message - why pay more for the same technology. They do claim that their modifications separate their amps from the crowd and it remains to be verified.
Lack of independent measurements in these amps is disturbing and Audioholics don't help much with that - they reviewed Seymour amp and DID NOT provide any measurements - the question is why?
Many manufacturers claim that they modify their products and these modifications result in audible changes - criticisms of these claims in this article are not very good (IMO) and there are NO data presented to either refute or verify such claims. Measurements could be a good start. Instead of providing measurements, only verbal skepticism is provided. Until somebody actually directly compares these amps and fails to document claimed differences using solid scientific methodology, it remains possible that these audible differences do exist.
The article referenced at the bottom by HIFICRITICS is a clever combination of some cherry-picked facts mixed with subjective and unsupported by anything statements (e.g. below average tremble, average bass quality, listener fatigue, etc.) intended to confuse the reader and to push a certain agenda. There are plenty of other similar subjective evaluations by various hifi reviewers that are exactly opposite to those presented by hificritics so why should we believe just one of them? There are no tests or measurements of specific amps that validate his claims.
It would be useful to include some comments by engineers who actually design class D amps (why not ask Dr. Karsten Nielsen for his comments? He designed his ICEPower amps for his PhD dissertation, which is actually available at the B&O website). I remember reading something by the Axiom amp designer and he was actually quite positive about ICE amps and stated that they are still at the top of the game.
The Following User Says Thank You to VladP For This Useful Post:
...But I was thinking of getting FIVE of the UGLY Behringer EP4000 amps, Bridge them, and get 4,000 WATTS RMS @ 4 ohms, 20Hz-20kHz, & 1% THD Per Channel...
And then hide them on the very bottom shelf.
But it so dosent fit the rest of your preppy gear serious though wyred or dsonic fit the mold without failure and the goldmound 5kw at the price of a small house would drive those DTs to levels that would make most bleed, ears that is. Are new speakers in order to help with the power load ?
But it so dosent fit the rest of your preppy gear serious though wyred or dsonic fit the mold without failure and the goldmound 5kw at the price of a small house would drive those DTs to levels that would make most bleed, ears that is. Are new speakers in order to help with the power load ?
Naah, I'm just messing around.
I'm quite content with the 150-watts RMS Per Channel, 20Hz-20kHz, 0.05% THD, 8 ohms, Denon power.
The highest volume I've actually used was -16 dB, and I wasn't even in the room.
I was eating in the dinning room, which is like 1,000 ft away.
I'm quite content with the 150-watts RMS Per Channel, 20Hz-20kHz, 0.05% THD, 8 ohms, Denon power.
The highest volume I've actually used was -16 dB, and I wasn't even in the room.
I was eating in the dinning room, which is like 1,000 ft away.
This my friends proves these amps are unwise investments IMO.
If you need real power get pro amps. The market is much more competitive and you will get more bang for the buck. You could drive a home theater completely with 3 Behringer EPs. Including a passive sub. That's around 750 toss in the DCX 2496 and for 1000 bucks you have a 5.1 channel Amp with eqing, and crossover capabilities.
In reality most of us our fine with even a mid fi amps power.
To answer the above questions I would recommend that you pay attention to the data sheets linked to theis article. Please pay close attention to the frequency response vs. phase graphs.
I have read this article a couple of times and I find myself still LMAO.
d.b.
Could you please point out for me reviews of other power amps that include phase graphs? I checked a few Audioholics reviews and I did not seem to find any graphs similar to the one presented for the ASP1000 ICE module. I would like to see similar graphs for other amps.
Attack of the Clone Amplifiers
serious though wyred or dsonic fit the mold without failure and the goldmound 5kw at the price of a small house would drive those DTs to levels that would make most bleed, ears that is. Are new speakers in order to help with the power load ?
Linear Mode
