Most readers of this forum having a level of insight, would most probably regard this content as 'hot marketing air'. And much of the rest of the white paper is in the same category.
You can download it here: http://www.tripath.com/tech.htm
But what makes me wonder is, that clearly Tripath want to distance themselves from Class D.
Is there in reality any difference between Class D and Class T ??
Although I don't know the exact differences on a detailed technical level, they do have similar roots. Tripath uses a variable switching frequency that varies according to output level. The switching frequency is rather high, up to 1MHz, which allows smaller filter components to be used at the expense of switching loss.
My guess as to why Tripath wanted to distance themselves from class D is because when Tripath was founded, 1995, class D wasn't yet a viable and accepted full range amplification technology. Skip to 2005 and we have several companies making great full range class D amps.
My guess as to why Tripath wanted to distance themselves from class D is because when Tripath was founded, 1995, class D wasn't yet a viable and accepted full range amplification technology. Skip to 2005 and we have several companies making great full range class D amps.
I think the Tripath Amp is what some other companies call class H, its the powersupply rails that switch here IIRC.
Seems I dont recall correctly.
Seems I dont recall correctly.
Tripath is a swithing amplifier and it's not class H. Class H involves rail voltages that step between different vaules depending on the power delivered to the load. This does not describe a Tripath amplifier.
Most self oscillating Class D amplifiers varies in frequency with load, just like Tripath. And today 9 out of 10 Class D amplifiers are actually self oscillating.
So is Class T just a variation of (more or less regular) Class D, only with the difference that it is marketed by Tripath?
So is Class T just a variation of (more or less regular) Class D, only with the difference that it is marketed by Tripath?
I think this general definition of Class D covers the Tripath technique very well.
So it seems strange that Tripath's marketing dept. are trying to distance themselves from this definition.
It's kind of like saying: over here in San Jose we are not breating regular air, but a special mixture of oxygen, nitrogen, methane and other exotic gases. 😀
By this time it's so technical that maybe some people don't get the fact that is actually IS regular air.
By now turning into 'Hot air' 😀 [joke]
The class definitions can be found here: http://forum.soundillusions.net/archive/index.php/archive/t-29820.html
Somebody also copied theme here:
http://members.tripod.com/Eli47/Page2.html
and included Class T, but unfortunately just a copy of Tripath's own advertisement material. So no real information to be found here 🙁
Lars Clausen said:
Rather question is why they took decision to change old name? Maybe it's attempt to save them money from the spend to reabilitation of the class D reputation, which was not so good in 1998.🙂
IVX: I think it goes like this:
The marketing people want to get the best sales, and traditionally that is accomplished by trying to show that you have a unique product. This same strategy is used for everything from soap and toothpaste to any other consumer product. Of course this strategy relies on the consumers to be intelligent enough to interest themselves in the 'difference', and also ignorant enough to not be able to see through the story.
For example we have here in Denmark a commercial for a toothpaste, that is special because it's without 'triclosan'. As a consumer i am simply too stupid to see if this is true, or if it is of any significance. 😕 Probably like 99.9% of everybody else.
In technical stuff like an amplifier, its all to easy to illude the consumers with this strategy.
So my guess is that, when Tripath wanted to market their Class D amplifiers, the marketing dept. came up with the idea: why not make a whole new class instead of class D, so it looks like it's very unique.
Since nobody can look inside our chips, they will never find out the truth. 
B&O Icepower also fell into the same pit when they started with the Icepower modules: No no we are not making just Class D, but Class BD (Very special!!! )
See here: http://www.classd.org/oem_products/products/b_o.htm
But then later they came to their senses, and now it's all Class D, like everybody else...... 😉 (Ups: except Tripath of course .. 😀 )
BTW: My own regular toothpaste also doesn't use Triclosan 😀
The marketing people want to get the best sales, and traditionally that is accomplished by trying to show that you have a unique product. This same strategy is used for everything from soap and toothpaste to any other consumer product. Of course this strategy relies on the consumers to be intelligent enough to interest themselves in the 'difference', and also ignorant enough to not be able to see through the story.
For example we have here in Denmark a commercial for a toothpaste, that is special because it's without 'triclosan'. As a consumer i am simply too stupid to see if this is true, or if it is of any significance. 😕 Probably like 99.9% of everybody else.
In technical stuff like an amplifier, its all to easy to illude the consumers with this strategy.
So my guess is that, when Tripath wanted to market their Class D amplifiers, the marketing dept. came up with the idea: why not make a whole new class instead of class D, so it looks like it's very unique.
Since nobody can look inside our chips, they will never find out the truth. B&O Icepower also fell into the same pit when they started with the Icepower modules: No no we are not making just Class D, but Class BD (Very special!!!
)See here: http://www.classd.org/oem_products/products/b_o.htm
But then later they came to their senses, and now it's all Class D, like everybody else...... 😉 (Ups: except Tripath of course .. 😀 )
BTW: My own regular toothpaste also doesn't use Triclosan 😀
Hi,
Lars my point to linking and quoting their white paper is exactly that it is all marketing garble. Much like the term "class T".
I posted it to clearly demonstrate their willingness to differentiate class t from class d, even though it's obviously class d.
You now ask why they want to do that. I think you gave them and their marketing department too much credit. Marketing, I highly doubt could enter into such a discussion, too busy debating over what color the box should be.
While class D also may have had a bad reputation amongst the magazine reviewers, it never had gained such a common foothold that the world at large would fear a good product, to the extent that in order to sell it you'd have to claim it as being a new class of its own.
Further to which, they clearly undertook alot more effort to market it in this way, than to simply say it's an improved class d or just one that works like the theory always said it should, instead they had to explain how it's unique from class d.... and as you can see that's all marketing, and alot of it, with entire app notes dedicated to selling their trademark as a unique topology.
The link you gave proves that point, one I brought up earlier, asking the student to draw you a class T output stage, they couldn't possibly, as you pointed out, it's all marketing, nothing technical.
So you want to know why they're trying to distance themselves from class d, that goal being an assumption on your part and others I'm sure.
Perhaps, in fact, the goal was to inflate ones ego, image, to sell and market the name instead of the product.
Wouldn't you love there to be a Class Clausen? I doubt your head is that big or your ego so wounded, but you get the idea.
Clearly, this comes from someone who's obsessed with titles, image, and holds no reservations against deceipt to further his own needs.
Pretty strong stuff I know, so I'll back it up with a few interesting points:
Someone Obsessed with titles:
Dr. Adya S. Tripathi: Founder, President and CEO
of Tripath Technology
Next question: Would Tripath deceive?
Why not ask their shareholders, who brought on a class action lawsuit for their deceptive and dishonest practices, which by the way, got settled out of court (spells GUILT in my book).
http://www.lerachlaw.com/cases/tripath/complaint.pdf
And the settlement info:
http://securities.stanford.edu/news-archive/2005/20050712_Settlement100757_Writer.html
"SETTLEMENT NEWS:
Tripath Announces Agreement To Settle Federal Securities Class Action Litigation
Staff Writer
Business Wire. July 12, 2005
_________________________________________________________________________
EXCERPT: Tripath Technology Inc. today announced that it has entered into a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement (the "Stipulation") to settle the securities class action litigation entitled In re Tripath Technology Inc. Securities Litigation, Master File No. C 04 4681 SBA, pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (the "Court") against Tripath and certain of its current and former officers and/or directors (the "Class Action"). The settlement class consists of all persons who purchased the securities of Tripath between January 29, 2004 and June 13, 2005, inclusive. As part of the Stipulation, Tripath and the other defendants continue to deny any liability or wrongdoing. Under the terms of the Stipulation, the parties agreed that the Class Action will be dismissed in exchange for a payment of $200,000 in cash by Tripath and the issuance of 2.45 million shares of Tripath common stock which shall be exempt from registration pursuant to Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933. The Stipulation remains subject to the satisfaction of various conditions, including without limitation (1) final approval of the Stipulation by the Court, including a finding that the 2.45 million shares of Tripath common stock to be issued are exempt from registration pursuant to Section 3(a)(1) of the Securities Act of 1933 and (2) notification to members of the settlement class in the Class Action. Terms for distribution of the settlement funds to class members after final Court approval of the Stipulation, and other terms of settlement, will be disclosed in a notice to be sent to class members after preliminary court approval of the Stipulation. "This settlement puts the federal securities litigation behind Tripath and will permit us to better focus on running the business and Tripath's future," said Jeffrey L. Garon, Tripath's Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer. "
In conclusion, it's a class d amplifier, and those who would follow them in their naming convention, will hopefully not follow them in their other business practices.
Not to mention they should realize naming a new class after themselves will make people like us _want_ to dig up the patent, figure it out, and we'll be here to speak the truth about it and the products they market with it (Nuforce, for example, who's using their customers as guinea pigs for an unproven product, wrongly labelled as class N).
Don't forget that back in the day when Tripath started with this the internet wasn't what it is today.
Regards,
Chris
Lars my point to linking and quoting their white paper is exactly that it is all marketing garble. Much like the term "class T".
I posted it to clearly demonstrate their willingness to differentiate class t from class d, even though it's obviously class d.
You now ask why they want to do that. I think you gave them and their marketing department too much credit. Marketing, I highly doubt could enter into such a discussion, too busy debating over what color the box should be.
While class D also may have had a bad reputation amongst the magazine reviewers, it never had gained such a common foothold that the world at large would fear a good product, to the extent that in order to sell it you'd have to claim it as being a new class of its own.
Further to which, they clearly undertook alot more effort to market it in this way, than to simply say it's an improved class d or just one that works like the theory always said it should, instead they had to explain how it's unique from class d.... and as you can see that's all marketing, and alot of it, with entire app notes dedicated to selling their trademark as a unique topology.
The link you gave proves that point, one I brought up earlier, asking the student to draw you a class T output stage, they couldn't possibly, as you pointed out, it's all marketing, nothing technical.
So you want to know why they're trying to distance themselves from class d, that goal being an assumption on your part and others I'm sure.
Perhaps, in fact, the goal was to inflate ones ego, image, to sell and market the name instead of the product.
Wouldn't you love there to be a Class Clausen? I doubt your head is that big or your ego so wounded, but you get the idea.
Clearly, this comes from someone who's obsessed with titles, image, and holds no reservations against deceipt to further his own needs.
Pretty strong stuff I know, so I'll back it up with a few interesting points:
Someone Obsessed with titles:
Dr. Adya S. Tripathi: Founder, President and CEO
of Tripath Technology
Next question: Would Tripath deceive?
Why not ask their shareholders, who brought on a class action lawsuit for their deceptive and dishonest practices, which by the way, got settled out of court (spells GUILT in my book).
http://www.lerachlaw.com/cases/tripath/complaint.pdf
And the settlement info:
http://securities.stanford.edu/news-archive/2005/20050712_Settlement100757_Writer.html
"SETTLEMENT NEWS:
Tripath Announces Agreement To Settle Federal Securities Class Action Litigation
Staff Writer
Business Wire. July 12, 2005
_________________________________________________________________________
EXCERPT: Tripath Technology Inc. today announced that it has entered into a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement (the "Stipulation") to settle the securities class action litigation entitled In re Tripath Technology Inc. Securities Litigation, Master File No. C 04 4681 SBA, pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (the "Court") against Tripath and certain of its current and former officers and/or directors (the "Class Action"). The settlement class consists of all persons who purchased the securities of Tripath between January 29, 2004 and June 13, 2005, inclusive. As part of the Stipulation, Tripath and the other defendants continue to deny any liability or wrongdoing. Under the terms of the Stipulation, the parties agreed that the Class Action will be dismissed in exchange for a payment of $200,000 in cash by Tripath and the issuance of 2.45 million shares of Tripath common stock which shall be exempt from registration pursuant to Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933. The Stipulation remains subject to the satisfaction of various conditions, including without limitation (1) final approval of the Stipulation by the Court, including a finding that the 2.45 million shares of Tripath common stock to be issued are exempt from registration pursuant to Section 3(a)(1) of the Securities Act of 1933 and (2) notification to members of the settlement class in the Class Action. Terms for distribution of the settlement funds to class members after final Court approval of the Stipulation, and other terms of settlement, will be disclosed in a notice to be sent to class members after preliminary court approval of the Stipulation. "This settlement puts the federal securities litigation behind Tripath and will permit us to better focus on running the business and Tripath's future," said Jeffrey L. Garon, Tripath's Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer. "
In conclusion, it's a class d amplifier, and those who would follow them in their naming convention, will hopefully not follow them in their other business practices.
Not to mention they should realize naming a new class after themselves will make people like us _want_ to dig up the patent, figure it out, and we'll be here to speak the truth about it and the products they market with it (Nuforce, for example, who's using their customers as guinea pigs for an unproven product, wrongly labelled as class N).
Don't forget that back in the day when Tripath started with this the internet wasn't what it is today.
Regards,
Chris
BTW, classd.com told about tripath, that them products have a troubles around EMI, a month ago i saw it.. cervin wega tripath based car audio amp, just kill FM radio if turned on, when turn off -FM is ok!
The only reason I brought up class N was to take the focus off the companies and put them on the moral principle involved. That is, call your amplifiers what they truly are and be honest about the whole thing. So class T and class N are those companies versions of class D.
We made this an issue on other threads, or should I say that other threads have gotten hyjacked by this debate. At any rate I feel we are all in agreement that there are those companies that misrepresent their products, or innovations in order to sell them. Whether or not it works, is another story.
One thing I would really like to know is, do these companies really have something truly different, or is it their wish that people look at them in that light? Because right now it appears as though they don't really have anything different in the whole scheme of things.
Terry 🙂
We made this an issue on other threads, or should I say that other threads have gotten hyjacked by this debate. At any rate I feel we are all in agreement that there are those companies that misrepresent their products, or innovations in order to sell them. Whether or not it works, is another story.
One thing I would really like to know is, do these companies really have something truly different, or is it their wish that people look at them in that light? Because right now it appears as though they don't really have anything different in the whole scheme of things.
Terry 🙂
NuForce is a class-D amplifier
Their web site never says anything about class-N, which probably means integration of SMPS and class-D into a single circuit. Class-D as a matter of fact IS a SMPS with a variable reference.
Class-T is obviously named after Dr.Tripathi. It's a class-D amp with highly variable switching frequency, in the lineage of sigma-delta modulator with patented bit-glueing to reduce switching frequency. For example the sequence 01010101 is modified into 11001100 therefore the same energy at half the frequency. If a differentiation is needed, class-T is a class-D with Dr.Tripathi's sigma-delta+bit-glueing techniques behind it.
Class-D has no cross-over distortion because there is no discontinuity in its operation of modulating the audio signal, whereas class-B uses a different device for the positive portion versus the negative portion of the audio signal.
The sound quality of class-D or any other class of amplifier depends on its distortion, bandwidth, and phase shift. The last two are somewhat related in "minumum phase" systems.
Their web site never says anything about class-N, which probably means integration of SMPS and class-D into a single circuit. Class-D as a matter of fact IS a SMPS with a variable reference.
Class-T is obviously named after Dr.Tripathi. It's a class-D amp with highly variable switching frequency, in the lineage of sigma-delta modulator with patented bit-glueing to reduce switching frequency. For example the sequence 01010101 is modified into 11001100 therefore the same energy at half the frequency. If a differentiation is needed, class-T is a class-D with Dr.Tripathi's sigma-delta+bit-glueing techniques behind it.
Class-D has no cross-over distortion because there is no discontinuity in its operation of modulating the audio signal, whereas class-B uses a different device for the positive portion versus the negative portion of the audio signal.
The sound quality of class-D or any other class of amplifier depends on its distortion, bandwidth, and phase shift. The last two are somewhat related in "minumum phase" systems.
Hi,
Keep looking and you'll find plenty of references to class N.
I dont' know what made you jump to the conclusion that it would have to mean a smps coupled to the amp?
Class T is obviously named after him if you've done any research on it.... Most probably don't know his name.
I think you're talking about their DPD(whatever) stuff? I guess that's how they're doing it now but class T was around long before that came to be. There certainly should be no differentiation needed...it is simply a class d amp.
Some of the poorer designs do suffer from a form of cross over distiortion depending on the type of modulator used. As far as discontinuities I think you need to look at the current and not the voltage, for possibly another form of cross over distortion.
Regards,
Chris
Keep looking and you'll find plenty of references to class N.
I dont' know what made you jump to the conclusion that it would have to mean a smps coupled to the amp?
Class T is obviously named after him if you've done any research on it.... Most probably don't know his name.
I think you're talking about their DPD(whatever) stuff? I guess that's how they're doing it now but class T was around long before that came to be. There certainly should be no differentiation needed...it is simply a class d amp.
Some of the poorer designs do suffer from a form of cross over distiortion depending on the type of modulator used. As far as discontinuities I think you need to look at the current and not the voltage, for possibly another form of cross over distortion.
Regards,
Chris
- Status
- Not open for further replies.