Re: Outlaw Audio M200/M2200 "Class G" Switching

[Karl Uppiano]

>>> **Like I said, It has been done before, with variable success rates.
>>> In reality, however, the BEST amplification is still high bias Class
>>> A/B, with no dodgy power supply rail switching schemes. Such schemes
>>> are really only ways to cut costs.
>>
>> It's done to cut down dissipation primarily. In high power amplifiers
>> this eventually become a very significant issue and might otherwise
>> require impossibly large heatsinks. It's an excellent way of improving
>> efficiency.
>>
>> Graham
>>
>
> netkkkkopin ggarbage

It is? Why? All engineering is a compromise. Engineers are always
constrained by cost, size, performance, reliability, complexity, esthetics,
marketing B.S. When cost is no object, as is often the case for high-end
hi-fi enthusiasts, that removes a huge constraint.

[Bertie the Bunyip]

"Karl Uppiano" > wrote in
news:NVxYg.706$AR6.264@trndny02:

>>>> **Like I said, It has been done before, with variable success
>>>> rates. In reality, however, the BEST amplification is still high
>>>> bias Class A/B, with no dodgy power supply rail switching schemes.
>>>> Such schemes are really only ways to cut costs.
>>>
>>> It's done to cut down dissipation primarily. In high power
>>> amplifiers this eventually become a very significant issue and might
>>> otherwise require impossibly large heatsinks. It's an excellent way
>>> of improving efficiency.
>>>
>>> Graham
>>>
>>
>> netkkkkopin ggarbage
>
> It is? Why? All engineering is a compromise. Engineers are always
> constrained by cost, size, performance, reliability, complexity,
> esthetics, marketing B.S. When cost is no object, as is often the case
> for high-end hi-fi enthusiasts, that removes a huge constraint.
>

Good grief.


Pooh bear is netkkkopin ggarbage.






Bertie

[Arny Krueger]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.130
> "Karl Uppiano" > wrote in
> news:NVxYg.706$AR6.264@trndny02:
>
>>>>> **Like I said, It has been done before, with variable
>>>>> success rates. In reality, however, the BEST
>>>>> amplification is still high bias Class A/B, with no
>>>>> dodgy power supply rail switching schemes. Such
>>>>> schemes are really only ways to cut costs.

The idea that class G is only a way to cut costs is false. At low power
levels it costs more to build a class G amplifier than a class A/B amp. You
can see this in the product lines of say QSC, who are one of the industry
leaders when it comes to designing, producing and selling class G
amplifiers. Their low-end models are class A/B. Power levels have to rise to
a certain level before the added parts and complexity required for Class G
starts paying off. I suspect that QSC even tips the scales towards class G
before pure economics cut in, because of the convenience factors.

>>>> It's done to cut down dissipation primarily.

Totally agreed.

>>>> In high power amplifiers this eventually become a very
>>>> significant issue and might otherwise require
>>>> impossibly large heatsinks.

When people step up to the problems of building mulit-killowatt amplifiers,
the space, weight, and size savings provided by class G become very
important.

>>>> It's an excellent way of improving efficiency.

>> It is?

For sure.

>> Why?

In a word, efficiency. The efficiency of a pure class A/B amplifier over a
range of typical use isn't all that wonderful. Numbers like 40% come to
mind. Class A/B amplifiers are generally most efficient near full output.
Class G essentially provides multiple "full output" operating points (one
for each power supply voltage) as power rises.

>> All engineering is a compromise. Engineers
>> are always constrained by cost, size, performance,
>> reliability, complexity, esthetics, marketing B.S.

Right on, and add convenience and general practicality.

>> When
>> cost is no object, as is often the case for high-end
>> hi-fi enthusiasts, that removes a huge constraint.

Hi Fi enthusiasts don't have infinite resources. There are issues like WAF
and simple practicality - a pure class A/B near-killowatt power amp can be
hard to ship except by truck, and difficult to simply get out of the box and
put on the shelf or in a rack.

[Bertie the Bunyip]

"Bret Ludwig" > wrote in
oups.com:

>
> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>
>



Aww. looks like I'm upsetting someone!




Far be it from me..


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip]

"Bret Ludwig" > wrote in
oups.com:

>
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> <<snip>>
>>
>> In a word, efficiency. The efficiency of a pure class A/B amplifier
>> over a range of typical use isn't all that wonderful. Numbers like
>> 40% come to mind. Class A/B amplifiers are generally most efficient
>> near full output. Class G essentially provides multiple "full output"
>> operating points (one for each power supply voltage) as power rises.
>>
>> >> All engineering is a compromise. Engineers
>> >> are always constrained by cost, size, performance,
>> >> reliability, complexity, esthetics, marketing B.S.
>>
>> Right on, and add convenience and general practicality.
>
> The problem is that high end buyers are willing to pay huge sums and
> the manufacturers are willing to shave build cost and take colossal
> profit margins rather than to put the full share of outlandish price
> into the product.
>
>>
>> >> When
>> >> cost is no object, as is often the case for high-end
>> >> hi-fi enthusiasts, that removes a huge constraint.
>>
>> Hi Fi enthusiasts don't have infinite resources. There are issues
>> like WAF and simple practicality - a pure class A/B near-killowatt
>> power amp can be hard to ship except by truck, and difficult to
>> simply get out of the box and put on the shelf or in a rack.
>
> Generally if you can afford such an amp you can afford the truck
> freight and a rigging crew to mount the beast if necessary.
>

Sez you..

Bertie

[Arny Krueger]

"Stuart Krivis" > wrote in message

> On 16 Oct 2006 16:45:28 -0700, "Bret Ludwig"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>> <<snip>>
>>>
>>> In a word, efficiency. The efficiency of a pure class
>>> A/B amplifier over a range of typical use isn't all
>>> that wonderful. Numbers like 40% come to mind. Class
>>> A/B amplifiers are generally most efficient near full
>>> output. Class G essentially provides multiple "full
>>> output" operating points (one for each power supply
>>> voltage) as power rises.
>>>
>>>>> All engineering is a compromise. Engineers
>>>>> are always constrained by cost, size, performance,
>>>>> reliability, complexity, esthetics, marketing B.S.
>>>
>>> Right on, and add convenience and general practicality.
>>
>> The problem is that high end buyers are willing to pay
>> huge sums and the manufacturers are willing to shave
>> build cost and take colossal profit margins rather than
>> to put the full share of outlandish price into the
>> product.
>
> It seems that most of the cost of many boutique amps is
> in the case and not the actual circuitry.

Not even that - its the marketing.

From a recent Mastercard ad: "Good review from Stereophile - priceless" ;-)

[Powell]

"Arny Krueger" wrote

Stuart Krivis wrote:

>> It seems that most of the cost of many boutique amps is
>> in the case and not the actual circuitry.
>
> Not even that - its the marketing.
>
Note: One Broke-A$$® said to another.