Digital amplification has been maturing steadily for a number of years now. Companies like Rotel and Axiom (among others) have proven that quality amps can be built with this technology, and there are undeniably both size and efficiency benefits to be had. The significantly greater efficiency means that the amps produce much less heat, which in turn means you need much less resources dedicated to heat rejection (heat sinks, etc.). That reduced heat rejection means you can build the amps smaller. In really big systems that operate frequently - which mainly relates to commercial installations - there can also be savings in HVAC equipment first cost and utility costs from both the lower amp power consumption and the reduced cooling load.

The trick is achieving at least equal sound quality at a price that justifies the amp. After all, in a typical residential environment the utility cost savings will amount to much less than a commercial facility, meaning the payback will be pretty painfully long if the only benefit is utility cost savings. If the cost savings comes at a reduced sonic fidelity, it becomes rather pointless.

Will I run out and buy new digital amps when they arrive? No, I don't think I will. I have seven channels of very nice amplification already sitting in the cabinet. They do a very fine job already. I don't have any current plans to make a change in that regard. When that day eventually comes, I will most likely look at digital amps, though. Much like LED lighting, the concept greatly appeals to the HVAC engineer in me, but I want the implementation to be satisfactory rather than settle for the novel concept of efficiency alone.


Even before companies like Sony, Pioneer, and Panasonic started using digital amp tech in their receivers, receiver amps were underpowered compared to separate power amps. The biggest problem was always the size of the power supply, with heat rejection being second in line (probably a very close second for class AB amps). When they moved to digital amps, they still had limitations on the power supply side. They also had no incentive to try to improve that when all their competitors were going to make deceptive claims about receiver amp power. (Ratings of 110W and 130W look good on spec sheets, and the note about being for just one channel driven are always small, easy to overlook, and often meaningless to the average consumer.)

Makers of separate power amps are in a different circumstance. If they're going to build a digital amp, they're going to have to do it right. Folks have asked Outlaw about digital amps for at least five years now, possibly longer. I think it's safe to say that Outlaw hasn't offered something yet because they wanted to do it right.