|
Post by Westie on Apr 4, 2021 8:48:14 GMT
I often hear folk saying that they will only have Class A amps because they sound better and have a certain sound. To me it’s just people falling for marketing BS.
I say this based on experience of owning a few and hearing no common sonic attributes or advantages. They have ranged from the original KSA 50 which was warm, meaty and a bit soft, to the Sugden A21a which was a bit cool, crisp and light, to the Kelvin Labs monoblocks which were weak, thin, cold and sterile.
Even if we accept there might be some advantage to Class A operation, there is another issue that renders it pointless. As I understand it, many amps biased heavily into class A will not deviate into Class B anyway unless you are playing very loud, have demanding music or inefficient speakers. So where is the advantage of an amp not switching for its entire output over one which doesn’t switch in normal use?
In my experience, Class A is meaningless other than to act as a comfort blanket to the superiority of the purchaser’s ego. If your amp makes your music sound enjoyable then it’s a success, whatever technology it uses. If it doesn’t do this, it’s a fail, whatever labels it bears.
|
|
|
Post by No.6 on Apr 4, 2021 12:31:08 GMT
More trouble than what they are worth, quite ironic when hi-fi enthusiasts turn their noses up at a few watts, after that im afraid its class A/B.. So then why not Technics Class AA amps? which were better sounding to the class A amps ive had. The Class AA used both Class A & Class B stages together. Super low crossover distortion. Even the Technics New Class A sounded better.
ofc no Hi-Fi Ego with a Tecnics amps is there.
|
|