When it comes to Boulder looking at gaps in their product range... So long as standards are maintained I wouldn't mind one bit if they fell within my means. But more excitingly they WILL continue to chase levels beyond what's already been achieved... Boulder in 40 years time! I can not imagine the prices, materials, design or performance.. but I bet their amps that are around now will STILL be great then. 👍🏻
From an objective performance perspective, I think we have reached the end of the class A era. If the goal is high-power, high damping, neutral "wire with gain", it's hard to beat today's best class D amps. I think that there will remain a small market for these among those that enjoy the technology for its own sake. Kind of like having a DEC Vax in your study, or an old Bugatti in your garage. Today, nobody buys these for their performance. It's about the love for how they were made.
Hello, Mark. Clearly, we will have to agree to disagree here. Your opening statements, “From an objective performance perspective…” and “If the goal is high-power, high damping, neutral "wire with gain", it's hard to beat today's best class D amps.” indicate two things to me. First, you are more interested in specifications and measurement than listening, and second, you likely have very little experience listening to the class of product under discussion here. I have followed “Class D” audio amplification since its “practical” development. My friend, the late John Ulrich, with Arnie Nudel, introduced the Infinity Systems Servo-Static I loudspeaker in the early 1970s. The Servo-controlled sub in that system was driven by one of the first “practical” audio applications of a Class D amp, which John named the SwAmp - for Switching Amplifier, which yielded 250 watts per channel, and ran at a switching frequency of 500 kHz! I have listened to the progress of this class ever since. And while Class D has consistently and rapidly matured (I had a Spectron Musician II in 2000 - a John Ulrich design that was a game changer, and many other UcD and Hypex devices since), especially with the advances leveraged using GaN transistors or the new Trajectum platform (Mola Mola’s refined Hypex Electronics NCORE® technology), even the very best entrants from this class do not offer the refinement of resolution and transparency one experiences at the feet of current flagship products from the likes of Audionet, Boulder, Soulution, True Life Audio, VAC, and others. Class D, as good as it has become, will continue get better. I expect that at some point, it may encroach upon, rival, or maybe even best the sonic envelope constructed by the most refined Class A and A/B machines available today. But that day is not yet here… Sorry.
I've auditioned and owned some of the best over the last 50 years. At dealers, shows, and my listening rooms. I won't make assumptions about your priorities, preferences, and experience as you did mine, so as you said - let's agree to disagree.
@@markrosenthal9108 Hello again, Mark. So, I’d apologize save for the fact that you needn’t make any “assumptions” about my “priorities, preferences, and experience.” And though I’ve been at this for over five decades now, all those things have been in the public domain in my writing for going on forty years at this point. With that on the table, your proclivities and experiences are completely unknown to us here. While you are welcome to expand upon them, there can be no question that your first statement clearly suggests that you support measurement over listening… And if you have somehow come to the opinion that even the most accomplished Class D amplifier out there (clearly, no one has heard everything, but…) can begin to present the subtleties and nuances of microdynamic expression (among other attributes) like a pair of Boulder 3050 mono’s (or some other equivalent quality electronics), you are only deluding yourself. So while we clearly disagree, I can just as clearly support my position.
Absolutely love to hear about great American audio companies on how they started, great job Greg.
Thanks for the coverage
@adsph Thank you for watching, and talking the time to write... 😁
When it comes to Boulder looking at gaps in their product range... So long as standards are maintained I wouldn't mind one bit if they fell within my means.
But more excitingly they WILL continue to chase levels beyond what's already been achieved... Boulder in 40 years time!
I can not imagine the prices, materials, design or performance.. but I bet their amps that are around now will STILL be great then.
👍🏻
From an objective performance perspective, I think we have reached the end of the class A era. If the goal is high-power, high damping, neutral "wire with gain", it's hard to beat today's best class D amps.
I think that there will remain a small market for these among those that enjoy the technology for its own sake. Kind of like having a DEC Vax in your study, or an old Bugatti in your garage. Today, nobody buys these for their performance. It's about the love for how they were made.
Hello, Mark. Clearly, we will have to agree to disagree here. Your opening statements, “From an objective performance perspective…” and “If the goal is high-power, high damping, neutral "wire with gain", it's hard to beat today's best class D amps.” indicate two things to me.
First, you are more interested in specifications and measurement than listening, and second, you likely have very little experience listening to the class of product under discussion here.
I have followed “Class D” audio amplification since its “practical” development. My friend, the late John Ulrich, with Arnie Nudel, introduced the Infinity Systems Servo-Static I loudspeaker in the early 1970s. The Servo-controlled sub in that system was driven by one of the first “practical” audio applications of a Class D amp, which John named the SwAmp - for Switching Amplifier, which yielded 250 watts per channel, and ran at a switching frequency of 500 kHz! I have listened to the progress of this class ever since.
And while Class D has consistently and rapidly matured (I had a Spectron Musician II in 2000 - a John Ulrich design that was a game changer, and many other UcD and Hypex devices since), especially with the advances leveraged using GaN transistors or the new Trajectum platform (Mola Mola’s refined Hypex Electronics NCORE® technology), even the very best entrants from this class do not offer the refinement of resolution and transparency one experiences at the feet of current flagship products from the likes of Audionet, Boulder, Soulution, True Life Audio, VAC, and others.
Class D, as good as it has become, will continue get better. I expect that at some point, it may encroach upon, rival, or maybe even best the sonic envelope constructed by the most refined Class A and A/B machines available today. But that day is not yet here… Sorry.
I've auditioned and owned some of the best over the last 50 years. At dealers, shows, and my listening rooms. I won't make assumptions about your priorities, preferences, and experience as you did mine, so as you said - let's agree to disagree.
@@markrosenthal9108 Hello again, Mark. So, I’d apologize save for the fact that you needn’t make any “assumptions” about my “priorities, preferences, and experience.” And though I’ve been at this for over five decades now, all those things have been in the public domain in my writing for going on forty years at this point.
With that on the table, your proclivities and experiences are completely unknown to us here. While you are welcome to expand upon them, there can be no question that your first statement clearly suggests that you support measurement over listening…
And if you have somehow come to the opinion that even the most accomplished Class D amplifier out there (clearly, no one has heard everything, but…) can begin to present the subtleties and nuances of microdynamic expression (among other attributes) like a pair of Boulder 3050 mono’s (or some other equivalent quality electronics), you are only deluding yourself. So while we clearly disagree, I can just as clearly support my position.