Are future improvements in Amp/PreAmps slowing to a crawl?

Regardless of the topology one chooses, the basic problem of building an amp that measures well and sounds good has been solved. Class D isn't going to bring about entirely new levels of fidelity. We already have amps that will drive any load with vanishing levels of noise and distortion. And a lot of people don't much like them. I think Nelson's point is that the challenge of building a well performing amp has been mastered and pretty much everything you see today is just someone's opinion of how to best implement a hand full of basic topologies in a manner that suits someone's tastes. In that, amp design is art. That doesn't take away from the technical challenge. 

^^Yup.

Eric

I built the low TIM Leach amp from Audio magazine, and followed through with the next year of 100+ circuit changes in the following issues. I also owned Leach’s L S R&D amps from his company.

He did not believe in matching transistors, and his amps were "average" sounding for their time!

His article just re-hashed what was known in amplifier circuits at the time. No breakthroughs IMO.

TIM was just "frequency overload" in fancy talk.

I never said the amps were exceptional, but that the paper put together the formula.

I am unaware of any other document before his paper that put together all the components that would become known as the SS formula. If there are, please share.

High distortion SS amps were no longer passable as hi-fi.

I have no idea what "frequency overload" means. Explain?

@dlcockrum

Yeah, you are not the only one! Apparently Carver did not have any PC's to do Monte Carlo simulations. It took him years to figure out the problems, AFAIK, related to switching voltages far too fast in the power supply, causing dead shorts.

Best,

E