Class A transistor power amp vs digital power amp.

A Class A bass amp, whatever the technology, would be a colossal waste of perfectly good power. It would also get very hot. I would not recommend it.

Class A power amps are audiophool stroke material anyway. The alleged aural benefits will be lost on all but the golden-eared.

 

At those 110 dB-ish volume levels of ours (us bassists), a distortion figure of 0.01 or 0.0001 percent isn't THAT important.

Getting pure, clean power, and as much of it as reasonably possible, in a small, light package, without tripping the circuit breakers, IS.

Class D amps would fit the last category perfectly. Huge power, small, light weight, high efficiency, good specs.

If you ask me, playing bass on a class A amp is like killing a mosquito with a stinger.

All in my humble opinion.

 

There's a Lux power amp here that is pure state-of-the-art; one of the finest audiophile amps ever produced. However, it weighs in at 85lbs and generates a fair amount of heat. Although it cranks out 300w/channel of pure class A power at immeasurably-low distortion levels, I would take my Fafner over it as a bass amp anytime.

 

I have a Glockenklang Soul head. It is absolutely stunning. Deep, warm AND articulate. The EQ is the bomb! I'm really spoiled now.

 

The Glocks don't use Class A power sections do they? They're probably talking about the preamp.

 

The Glocks don't use Class A power sections do they? They're probably talking about the preamp

I think the pre in the Soul is Class A. I think that the Bass Art head is all Class A. Both are quite awesome. I think anyway.

 

Getting to point...Yes sir, right away! I think Glocks are fatter sounding and the EQ is more musical. Oh yes! Better now? Love to all!

 

Since their power requirments are seemingly small preamps such as the Avalon U/5, Glock Bass Art, and others can preform all their functions within a class A circut. Power amps have a much larger power requirment and while there are some pure class A amplifiers available they are typicaly of low power, say 50 watts.

More common are A/B class amplifiers which typicaly run their first few watts (10-25 watts) is class A and switching to class B after that. The sonic differences may only be noticable in the mid to high frequencies of a high quality high fidelity playback system and would do very little in a bass rig. If your looking for a clean hi-fi sound I have found the sonic differences between class A preamps and the rest to be substantial.

So called Digital amps are usually hybrid in design with say a J-FET input stage feeding a microprocessor which then turns Mos-
FETs full on and off so quickly that they barely get warm, then outputs to a transformer and on to a speaker. These amps are electronicaly very efficient (very little heat) and can compete sonicly with amplifiers of much greater output.

I have replaced my venerable QSC 2402PLX with a less powerful Carver-Pro ZR1600. The sonic differences in the powering of my subwoofer are very noticable. The B string is a great deal closer to what I hear through the headphones in regards to clairaty and deffinition.

Do not missunderstand me, the QSC is an amazing amp that has provided myself and many others here with solid faultless service which is why I wouldn't even think of selling it. The're that good! I won't know of the Carver's durability for a while yet.

FYI, The all tube powered Pip Dreams (very large ultra high end speaker systems) room at this years Home Entertainment 2003 in San Francisco was powering their two subs with some very handsome aluminium faced QSC amplifiers. I didn't hear any fan noise and no model number was available.

 

They would've been preliminary units from the upcoming SRA (Studio Reference Amplifier) Series. How did they sound?

 

Vic,

You made a comment about this on the audio asylum right? How did the Carver perform compared to the Crown?

 

Though you can argue the theoretical differences between the various amp types, it will do you little good in selecting an amp. What is more important is how each manufacturer implements those designs. In general, manufacturers try to build power amps that do not color the sound, but nobody is perfect. So, there are difference that can be heard.

Personal experience tells me that in a live performance it is unlikely that the audience will care which amp you are using. Assuming that the amp has sufficient power for the gig, it will probably sound fine. Given that, I like to select power amps based on weight. The lighter the better for me.

 

Yes, Very similar to my post above. I keep going back to the words, clear and defined, without geeting overly audiophilic about describing the improvment.

 

It's difficult to assess actual sonic potential at these sorts of shows with such small rooms and overextended AC. Listening to so many new products I've never seen nor heard before, it's almost like wine tasting. The idea is to have a look and get sort of an idea of the sound. Many manufactures have given up and provide static displays only.

I visited that room twice and both times they were playing those large black platers that sound very nice but fail to provide any low bass information. Don't forget this is a crowd that tends to glorify sleepy sounding systems and when a sub is used it must sound "musical" which of course means turned way down. The Pipe Dreams room was supposed to be a six channel system but some key pieces of gear missed the boat. So I'm not sure if I even heard there subs. They were on and connected, but I really couldn't tell.

The amps looked great on the outside!