Topping LA90 Review (Integrated Amplifier)

[temps]

Maybe.

Crude calculation. 1 speaker 1 meter.

A "little louder" ups the ante quickly.

Need some headroom?

View attachment 202494

Now do that again for a guy like me using a 91dB efficient speaker.... more than adequate, even for HT use. Even in your example, it's perfectly adequate for a music application, provided you're using a sub and understand modern program material - which nobody in this thread apparently does - and want to avoid hearing damage - which I guess is what everyone in this thread wants.

Regardless, the vast majority of listening is going to happen at levels under 5 watts, where this LA90 is 12 to 20dB better than a Purifi. People seem quite upset that the previous SOTA has been beaten so convincingly. And all the whining about the price... People have charged much more for groundbreaking performance in the past. Hell, even today many companies happily charge many, many times this for much worse.

Is it a good amp for people listening to KEF LS50s from across the room? Nope, not at all. Put those KEFs on a desk though and listen nearfield and it's fine. If you have 90dB efficient floorstanders, you can't do better. $800 is cheap enough for this level of performance I would just get two of them if I wanted a lot of power in reserve, because even in bridged operation it's STILL as good as it gets.

 

[RayDunzl]

Why does power = 2 W at 87 dB when sensitivity is 87 at 1 W?

The voltage standard (if there is one) for the sensitivity test seems to be 2.83V

One watt dissipated in an 8 ohm speaker, 2 watts in a 4 ohm speaker.

Halve the "resistance" with the same applied voltage yields double the watts.

 

[Talisman]

To all of the arm chair engineers who think they could do better, here's a suggestion:
Raise capital
Design product
Market and sell said profuct.

This amp with one of their balanced DAC's fed by a lossless source feeding some 87 dB+ eff speakers will give SotA performance.

Do better than that, then your criticisms may bear weight.

The meaning of this comment completely escapes me. It is EXACTLY the opposite.
If it were a company that only does shoddy stuff no one would care what they do, but it is precisely because we see enormous potential in Topping as engineering skills applied to audio that we would like it to do more than just an engineering exercise that basically has the sole purpose. to show that IT CAN BE DONE.
Ok, well you can do it, well done. But now let's focus on something that is really useful, putting high level performance in a real integrated with various inputs, integrated dac and maybe two sets of outputs for the speakers, with a nice big case, and well cooled, with internal power supply, with a display that gives useful information ...
Or a real Topping power amp, with a solid case and clean 150/250 watts into 8Ohm.
This isn't meat and it's not fish, it doesn't have the usability and convenience of an integrated, it doesn't have the horsepower to be a real power amp.
This is an engineering exercise.
Someone has written before me, and I agree, that the Cambridge cxa81 / 61 took a headless panther for objectively poor sinad performance but that hardly anyone had noticed, except by plugging their ear into the Tweeter and firing the volume knob to the maximum, but which in its 900/1200 euros included a large number of analog inputs, a whole set of digital inputs (therefore a dac), two sets of speaker outputs, a beautiful case, a motorized volume knob with a nice remote control etc ....
Let's say that users basically asked for two things, after the pa5 topping
- more power
- more functionality
None of these. Topping still gives us sinad, which was more than great 30db ago ....

And let's get to the price, now start getting serious, 800 euros is an important expense for a box with two inputs and one entrance, people must find a real reason to buy it thinking that at 500 euros there is hypex ncore by audiophonics hpa s250nc , which offers 150watt at 8 ohms with performance in any case of the highest level, or if that's okay that power can find the topping pa5 but at 350 euros, less than half, with acoustically IDENTICAL performance, and if you are on this site you know that it is ...
In short, I'm sorry because I see it as a wasted opportunity and because I believe that Topping can offer more to the audio market.

 

[razamanaz]

Everything is optimal for me. It's just inconvenient that the power supply is separate. I will buy in six months if there are no bad reviews about reliability

 

[Ingenieur]

Crude measurements
Eno, bass heavy
~80 dBA, peaks of 100 dBZ
A bit louder than normal, typically ~ 75 dBA
~11'
Fluke 87
We can assume the peaks are bass and 40 Hz to peak ~ 6 mS, so should be captured.

The 'peak' is true peak, not RMS
The min, max, avg are RMS
Assuming my min Z of 6 Ohm
(11.5/sqrt2)^2 / 6 = 11 W
Peak 22 W

 

[Ingenieur]

The meaning of this comment completely escapes me. It is EXACTLY the opposite.
If it were a company that only does shoddy stuff no one would care what they do, but it is precisely because we see enormous potential in Topping as engineering skills applied to audio that we would like it to do more than just an engineering exercise that basically has the sole purpose. to show that IT CAN BE DONE.
Ok, well you can do it, well done. But now let's focus on something that is really useful, putting high level performance in a real integrated with various inputs, integrated dac and maybe two sets of outputs for the speakers, with a nice big case, and well cooled, with internal power supply, with a display that gives useful information ...
Or a real Topping power amp, with a solid case and clean 150/250 watts into 8Ohm.
This isn't meat and it's not fish, it doesn't have the usability and convenience of an integrated, it doesn't have the horsepower to be a real power amp.
This is an engineering exercise.
Someone has written before me, and I agree, that the Cambridge cxa81 / 61 took a headless panther for objectively poor sinad performance but that hardly anyone had noticed, except by plugging their ear into the Tweeter and firing the volume knob. thoroughly, but which in its 900/1200 euros included a large number of analog inputs, a whole set of digital inputs (therefore a dac), two sets of speaker outputs, a beautiful case, a motorized volume knob with a nice remote control etc ....
Let's say that users basically asked for two things, after the pa5 topping
- more power
- more functionality
None of these. Topping still gives us sinad, which was more than great 30db ago ....

And let's get to the price, now start getting serious, 800 euros is an important expense for a box with two inputs and one entrance, people must find a real reason to buy it thinking that at 500 euros there is hypex ncore by audiophonics hpa s250nc , which offers 150watt at 8 ohms with performance in any case of the highest level, or if that's okay that power can find the topping pa5 but at 350 euros, less than half, with acoustically IDENTICAL performance, and if you are on this site you know that it is ...
In short, I'm sorry because I see it as a wasted opportunity and because I believe that Topping can offer more to the audio market.

For it 'escaping' you, you sure had a lot to say about it.
Not sure what your point is.
Don't buy it, it's your $.

Regardless of our opinion it does not change the fact that it is a great product at a fair price.
60 W is plenty as is 3 inputs.
I use 2, phono and DAC.
Many I bet use only 1.

 

[beefkabob]

It's superb! Too bad I've gone with active speakers.

 

[Mulder]

May I suggest that all those who prefer to insult each others, or enter the endless discussion about price relative value, or whatever that is not related to the technical aspects of the product, can you do so in another thread. Realise that you don´t have to tell us about everything that comes to your mind. We who really wants to read substantial postings are forced to wade through amounts of irrelevant nonsense to find the posts that have something relevant to say.

 

[Georgrig]

Sorry, slightly off-topic question and I haven´t read all the thread if it maybe has been discussed before, but in the photo below, from the Shenzhenaudio page of the LA90, what device is it sitting right in the middle of the picture (being neither A90, nor Pre90, nor Ext90 nor D90se, nor U90)?

A new device called A90 Discrete. Already mentioned in the thread.

 

[F1308]

I wonder why Topping chose horizontal heatsink fins instead of vertical ? Esthetics ? Not much difference in practice when it comes down to heatsinking ?

I think perhaps turbulence (one of its properties being dissipation of energy) build-up might be the trick involved, since vertical fins seems to provide several independent chimneys, not helping each other as far as I can see it...

 

[Ingenieur]

I wonder why Topping chose horizontal heatsink fins instead of vertical ? Esthetics ? Not much difference in practice when it comes down to heatsinking ?

Hard to guess.
Depends on internal layout
And vent intakes in the bottom.
You would think vertical is better for convection. Perhaps this allows more surface area per power device mounted to it?

 

[Doodski]

I think perhaps turbulence (one of its properties being dissipation of energy) build-up might be the trick involved, since vertical fins seems to provide several independent chimneys, not helping each other as far as I can see it...

According to this <.pdf> the vertical orientation is more effective at dissipating heat.

 

[anmpr1]

I think that for a traditional old school audiophile who hates class d, two monoblocks in class ab can be a good alternative, 1) in the end for 1600 dollars you will get the cleanest 100 watts in 8 ohms that exist. 2) let's compare that with amps that measure poorly and are worth 5 times that value. Seen that way, it doesn't look bad. 3) What worries me the most is its ability in monoblock mode to handle lower impedance in the speakers.

1) If 8 ohms is the threshold, then what you write is the case. Certainly it's true of all the amps tested on ASR. However, any bridged amplifier that cannot dip lower than 8 ohms is pretty questionable, in my mind, and in the context of year 2022. Although if we are quibbling, one gets the cleanest 95 watts into 8 ohms.

2) As far as more expensive amps? There are probably some expensive tube amps that don't like to dip into lower ohmage territory. But even most tube amps have 4 ohm taps. So from that perspective, this thing performs worse than most tube amps.

3) I think you are well founded in your skepticism.

I don't know, but it looks like this box was designed to play ASR. The SINAD game. In some applications, perhaps limited applications, or even for most desktop applications, it's likely a good choice (if you can ignore certain intangibles, like low power in a power amplifier, support/warranty, and so forth). However, to my mind it's really not very good value for its price. I certainly would not say it 'looks bad', but it doesn't look that good to me, given what is out there.

Respective it's performance, this review kind of reminds me of some of the car magazines, who a year or two ago were knocked out by the zero to sixty times posted by Tesla's 'ludicrous' mode feature. At the same time ignoring the general impracticality of using the feature, not to mention all the other positive and useful things you got with something more traditional, like a GT3 or Corvette.

 

[Ingenieur]

The voltage standard for the sensitivity test is 2.83V

One watt dissipated in an 8 ohm speaker, 2 watts in a 4 ohm speaker.

Halve the "resistance" with the same applied voltage yields double the watts.

View attachment 202511

View attachment 202512

I have a rudimentary understanding of Ohms Law, power etc.
My point is if testing a 4 Ohm speaker would they not adjust V to get 1 W so you could compare apples to apples?

 

[Doodski]

However, to my mind it's really not very good value for its price. I certainly would not say it 'looks bad', but it doesn't look that good to me, given what is out there.

It's a nice box although the value to performance is just not there. Is this amp supposed to compete with the British integrated amps? A person must really want this to spend the money on one.

 

[RayDunzl]

Now do that again for a guy like me using a 91dB efficient speaker....

Yes, as in all things audio, "it depends".

provided you're using a sub and understand modern program material - which nobody in this thread apparently does

I'm in this thread, and do (I have cheap subs, and I think a fairly good handle on what the squiggly lines are up to), but I'm nobody, so I guess you are technically correct.

Regardless, the vast majority of listening is going to happen at levels under 5 watts, where this LA90 is 12 to 20dB better than a Purifi.

I guessticalculate my system as having around an 85dB SINAD, and I've never heard it make any sound other than what was intended to be provoked by the program material.

On that basis, I'll stay with what's here and working and paid for and probably maintaining its $$$ value to some other fool, becoming kinda old and somewhat cranky about things. I try to keep the crankiness under control, lower stress, and all that.

Nice measurement on the Topping, it pushes the boundary for at least one set of limits. Nothing wrong with that. I'm trying to squeeze out as much drag as I can on my new 42 year old glider with vinyl tape over gaps and silicone around the canopy and such, instead of ordering a $150,000 rig with a 2 year wait time.

It has a rating of 36:1 for a glide ratio, but I recently saw 167.5:1 measured during particularly good atmospheric conditions As with most everything "it depends".

 

[Ingenieur]

Some of Crowns commercial amps require 8 Ohm or greater when bridged.
With a Power-Tech or Com-Tech amplifier you need to stay at 8 ohms or greater.

 

[RayDunzl]

My point is if testing a 4 Ohm speaker would they not adjust V to get 1 W so you could compare apples to apples?

Because the standard (if there is one) is to use the same amplifier voltage.

There are no 8 nor 4 nor any other single value impedance speakers if you look closely at the measurement thereof.

 

[Billy Budapest]

Any ideas as to what this unit could be? I'm not sure if we've seen anything about it before. Could perhaps be a new version of the A90?
View attachment 202440

I believe it is the A90 Discrete. Had someone answered this already?

 

[rebbiputzmaker]

Sure. I wanted to do this but with timing pulled ahead a day, I didn't get a chance.

If you can that would be cool eventually.

And then maybe using DSP roll off the bottom say at 80 or 100 just to see how it does vs full range.