Advice on integrated amp for Wharfedale Diamonds 230

[Roland]

Both manufacturers have a history of making excellent amps. The only risk you run is that your Wharfedales sound just the same as they did with the R-N301.

 

[UniPolar]

Sounds as if you are making progress

One thing of note, psychologists say we remember negative events and feelings longer and they are buried deeper into the psyche than the positive ones.
In other words, one single negative 'review' sways the person more than a single positive one.

Manufacturers know this.. Political candidates also, and some negative 'reviews' ( and positive for that matter ) are made by paid 'influencers' and folks with little credibility and expertise to back up their claims lopsided opinion.

Looking forward to hearing your final decision..
.

At this point I lean more towards the Yamaha for the “complete package” on the budget aspect, more than anything, and largely assured by Willem’s argument that the R-N series have “proper” stereo amplification stage and not my previous concern as being cheapo AVRs repackaged as stereo integrates. In the other hand, I understand it’s an all-in-one box with added streaming capabilities, room correction and all, which from a measuring standpoint do degrade the signal quality (as probably any additional digital processing would do), but at this point I listed these extended features in the asvantages bucket because from what I can understand from Amir’s measurements, it would hardly be an issue in practice, at an audible level. Right? Right??!

As it happens, I’m looking for a purchase within the next 2 months (need to address other stuff first, but I want to make my mind in the meantime), so I’m not hard pressed to do it tomorrow.

Aditionally, I discovered a “hugely” discounted Rotel RA-1572 on the local market at around the 1000€ mark, so i’s say in the same ballpark with the Yamaha.
Now, I see “some” probably more subjective reviewers site (i don’t know if i can say who, but i guess you already know them) bashing the 1572 (and the a14 for that matter) for falling short (and quite hard!) on “timing and dynamics”. It’s a very concerning review. Curiously enough, a second review of the 1572 i was able to find online states quite the opposite ), so yeah, talking about subjectivism…
The reason i bring this amp into question is the original msrp ar around 1500€ mark, which makes me “think” i’d have the opportunity to buy a better amp for the money, given the almost 50% discount.
So now I guess I’m considering the Yamaha and the Rotel (if it so happens that the bashing article is misleading and biased on ads grounds).

 

[brotakul]

Indeed, when you plant the seed of doubt…

 

[V.b.]

Since you are asking around here, why don't you get a Hypex?

An NC252mp, a balanced DAC and a Raspberry pi.

Audiophonics NC252mp is 470 euro for 125w/8ohm, a Topping d30pro is 400 euro and a pi is 50 euro.

If you want Bluetooth on dac, you can look at smsl m200 or su-9.

 

[Doodski]

Since you are asking around here, why don't you get a Hypex?

An NC252mp, a balanced DAC and a Raspberry pi.

Audiophonics NC252mp is 470 euro for 125w/8ohm, a Topping d30pro is 400 euro and a pi is 50 euro.

If you want Bluetooth on dac, you can look at smsl m200 or su-9.

For sure. Then later can add a MiniDSP 2x4 or a MiniDSP 2x4 HD and have a boss system.

 

[V.b.]

Moodeaudio recently has DSP built in, Airplay, Spotify and Bluetooth on Pi. He only needs to borrow a microphone.

 

[reddie.k]

The R-N301 doesn't have the power needed to properly drive the speakers. The max power consumption for this amp is 200 W and only 165 for the asian model (user manual). About 40%-50% of this power is transformed to heat (Class A/B amp). That leaves in the best case 100-120 Watts for 2 channels, that is 50-60 Watts per channel. (much less for the asian model.)

So for A/B amplifiers check the total Watt consumption as above. The weight of an A/B amplifier is a good indication of its power (large heavy capacitors, large heavy heatsinks, heavy power supply). Also a good indication is if an amplifier nearly doubles its Watt output at 4 ohms. My Yamaha A-S2000 is rated at 2x90 Watts at 8 ohms and 2x150W at 4 ohms but it's a beast. It weighs about 23 kilos (50 lbs) and can drive most difficult speakers. Power consumption is 350 Watts. Maybe you can find one used, or an used A-S1000 or an A-S1100 within your budget.

For Class D amps the heat losses are about 10% or less, so they are much smaller and lighter, don't get very warm and output a lot of power.

If it was me nowadays I would go to an active speaker solution with lots of connections and ample power to drive the speakers:

https://gr.teufelaudio.com/ultima-40-active-105785000)

 

[nn_in]

If this helps.I have used RN803

Hi there, guys! Like they say: long-time lurker, first time poster - and very excited!

I'm building my first stereo system. I have virtually no way to audition gear in my country, at a reasonable distance from my home. All decisions I make are based on the more-or-less subjective arguments and opinions I find online. As you could guess from the speakers choice, I went for a more budget system, as that's what I can afford right now.

Having said that, I went for the Diamonds for the "richer", "warmer" sound, as I tend to use the system all day long so it should be relatively easy to listen to (me and my wife do a lot of home-office, especially these days...). I'm very pleased with the Diamonds. I'm currently using a Yamaha R-N301 stereo receiver, which ticks all the right boxes, as I am deep into streaming (Spotify and Apple Music).

A few considerations:
- the stereo system is used in an ~18 square meters living-room (3.5m*5m)
- I measure around 75dB loudness as "comfortable level" at listening position (~3meters away from speakers) - living in a flat, can't/won't go much louder than this.
- I love the mids on the 230, but would appreciate detailed/airy highs and a more forward presentation in the mids too. The R-N301 feels a bit laid-back.
- won't change the speakers, so please don't recommend this. Heard B&Ws, Dali's, Focal's, they are all great!, for the first hour. Anything longer than that, not for me. Plus, i'm not looking to start over with the speakers. I feel I'm comfortable with these, they just need a bit of help...

I got the Yamaha R-N301 very cheap (used), so it was a great choice to begin with, but I'm looking to upgrade it. My complaints with it are, as follows:
- it's very neutral, uninvolved, almost feels "lifeless" in presentation
- it's not really dynamic (might actually be related to first point), it's rated at 100Wpc but it sure doesn't feel so - maybe it's poor with transient sounds, bursts and impact (small capacitors??) that makes it feel "lifeless", even if it can get loud?

From what I could gather as info until now, I came up with a "short list" of amps that should not, in any way, exceed the 1000eur budget (ideally 7-800 really..):
- go for a decent "vintage" amp on used market, like the NAD C370 - should be the cheapest solution to get good amplification for a good budget. I have a Pi with a decent DAC HAT that i can connect to it and use it, at least until I can go for something like the Bluesound Node 2i.
- Yamaha R-N803D - still Yamaha, I know, but a distant audio retailer that I contacted for advice, said that it's got better power supply (along with a better DAC, needless to say...) and it should be more dynamic to the sound. I've read the review posted here by Amirm and it seems to be quite poor outside pure-direct mode (using YPAO for example, which would be one of the selling-points for this amp), plus I've also read (on the comparison thread between R-N803/A-S801/A-s701 that all these amps are really AVRs from the 90s, tech wise, with streaming function added to them - this really puts me off, since an R-N803 is still nearly 1000eur in my country and I feel it's not worth the money.
- Cambridge CXA61 - fits great within budget, can use the Pi with it, has great reviews all around, but I'm concerned about the 60Wpc power output. Will it affect the dynamics of the amp? Sure, the CXA81 will probably be better, but it's just too expensive, well above the budget. Unfortunately, the prices are really high in my country. When I look at places like UK or US... damn man, the envy.... )
- Cambridge Azur 851 - it's on HUGE sale for quite some time here, down to around 1000eur (same as R-N803), sure it has no streaming features, but it has lots of power and it just seems so much more as a "proper" amp (big toroidal power supply, clean design inside (electronics), it "feels" well built. But.... I read a lot of complaints online on the reliability of this amp and other Cambridge gear, which again puts me off. I just don't know if it's worth it. On the other hand, from what I understand, the Cambridge sound should be more "forward" and "lively" than the Yamaha and it would probably go just great with the Diamonds! Frankly, who am i kidding here, I just don't know...

So there you have it. Honestly, I want to get what everybody wants: the best for the buck, but with a focus on quality. I have to admit that the integrated streaming features of the Yamaha sound great and it would probably be the easiest, most comfortable unit to use out of all, but the idea of being an old-design, feature-stipped frankenstein AVR for that much money... I could honestly give up on the streaming features (in the end, I could always get a cheapo wxad-10, or the better Bluesound) and in turn go for the better built integrated amp.

So, what do you think? is the Yamaha a good sounding compromise? Or should I go for a more classic amp like the Cambridge? Or maybe go used and cheap, because the choices within the given budget are simply not worth it?

Thanks for chipping in with ideas.

I have used CA,Yamaha,Marantz,Denon Integrated Amps.
Also have used Yamaha RN803 with Wharfedale 11.2
IMO Yamaha price-value-performance-consistent build quality is a big plus.

 

[nn_in]

Both manufacturers have a history of making excellent amps. The only risk you run is that your Wharfedales sound just the same as they did with the R-N301.

I would contend that RN 602,803 would sound better . Especially at low listening volumes the difference will be there.803 uses AS701/801 amp module.

 

[MarkS]

Changing amps will NOT change the sound.

If you don't believe me, buy the new amp (whatever one you want), then arrange to do a blind comparison between your old and new amps. (You will need another person to help you do this.)

Best way is NOT to try to do instant switching, but to have one amp or the other installed for a day (or more), listen and decide about the sound quality. Then have your helper flip a coin, and, depending on the results, switch or don't switch amps. Then listen for a day or more. Keep track of which days the system sounds better. Your helper must also keep track of which amp was installed on which days. (And you, of course, must not know which amp is installed on which day.) When you've done this enough times to be convinced that either (1) you do not hear a difference from day to day, or (2) you DO hear a difference, and you're confiedent you can tell which amp was installed on which days, compare your records of sound quality with your helper's records of which amp was installed.

Prediction: you WILL NOT hear a difference.

But actually, you most likely will not do this. No one does. Almost everyone prefers to indulge their fantasies and spend lots of money doing so.

 

[Doodski]

Best way is NOT to try to do instant switching

How is one supposed to hear a difference when the memory for sound is perhaps less than a second? Your method is flawed in that having a switch is the only way to compare amps. True that the amplifier will make a little difference but the OP seems to want to buy something with more power.

 

[MarkS]

If you can't hear a difference from day to day, the difference that you MIGHT be able to hear in a rapid switch is meaningless.

There are plenty of MEANINGFUL differences in sound. For example, the other day, the Holst Planets was playing over the radio on my decidedly not high-end system. It sounded quite bad. I looked up the particular recording, and found that many reviews of it on amazon complained about the poor sound quality. (Which was surprising, because it was a modern recording by Reference, usually a high quality label).

This was easily perceivable, no switching or comparing needed at all.

Those are the differences that matter. Chasing down tiny differences in amp sound (usually due to small frequency-response differences that would be dwarfed by moving a speaker a few inches) makes no sense at all to me.

 

[Doodski]

If you can't hear a difference from day to day, the difference that you MIGHT be able to hear in a rapid switch is meaningless.

There are plenty of MEANINGFUL differences in sound. For example, the other day, the Holst Planets was playing over the radio on my decidedly not high-end system. It sounded quite bad. I looked up the particular recording, and found that many reviews of it on amazon complained about the poor sound quality. (Which was surprising, because it was a modern recording by Reference, usually a high quality label).

This was easily perceivable, no switching or comparing needed at all.

Those are the differences that matter. Chasing down tiny differences in amp sound (usually due to small frequency-response differences that would be dwarfed by moving a speaker a few inches) makes no sense at all to me.

I understand your viewpoint although the OP wants a bigger badder amp.

 

[MarkS]

Sure, that's fine. But it's not going to change the sound.

 

[brotakul]

If i may chip in..

As i said towards the begining of this thread, i had the opportunity to hear my speakers for about a month driven by my own Yammi 301 and an NAD319. The difference in the sound was quite obvious to me. Mostly, there were 2 aspects to the difference: 1) cleaner, more detailed mids (this i cannot explain, might be something related to electronics, distorsion, things that are beyond me…), and 2) the sound was more dynamic, the speakers were “alive”, as with the 301 they seemed flat, boring.
I listened to my usual songs, personal reference songs let’s say, that i know how they sound on my setup. So i tried to use these as a reference point, using the cues i knew to decide the extent of the difference (because for me there clearly was a difference, it was just a matter of “how much” and “in what way”).
Some say all amps sound the same at the same loudness level. As in, the amp should not change the sound, just amplify it. They should be transparent, or at least the good ones do. Then, i think that the NAD 319, being a more powerful amp, drove my speakers better, easier, cleaner than the 301. I’m not saying either amp “colors” the sound in any way, i don’t have the experience and the means to argue that, but something was happening, something was different and the power seems to me as being the “culprit”.
For me, the way amps are rated in terms of power, is not clear. I read about it, the way they calculate it, it seems to me it’s more marketing than anything else. And indeed, as someone else said here, the 301 may not have more than 50/60wpc with that power supply. I look at other amps and their specs, huge toroidal transformers, more often than not capable of max consumptions in the 400-500w (or more), lots of big capacitors for power reserve, and they are rated maybe lower than the 301 in power. Look at the Cambridge CXA 81.
I hope i’m not mistaken, but the 803 has a considerably more powerful trasnformer than the 301. Then, how they can both be rated at 100wpc? And i’m not trying to lose myself in specs here, but maybe that’s why they sound different? Because the NAD is 120wpc, but the extra 20w over the Yammi 301 is negligible in terms of dB. Then, maybe the construction itself (and more probably the transformer and capacitance) is the one making a difference.
I don’t know, i’m trying to explain it and trying to relate to things i read about, searching for an answer, so i would understand the “why” and so i would know what to look for. I may be wrong, i accept it, but then something else (that i’m missing here) is at work, because again: the difference is obvious, and i’m not (by any means) a fine audiophile with ultrasonic hearing.
Please, don’t throw rock, use pillows

 

[Doodski]

The difference in the sound was quite obvious to me. Mostly, there were 2 aspects to the difference: 1) cleaner, more detailed mids (this i cannot explain, might be something related to electronics, distorsion, things that are beyond me…), and 2) the sound was more dynamic, the speakers were “alive”, as with the 301 they seemed flat, boring.

I experienced a similar thing with a specific $3500.00 (1990's dollars) USA made power amplifier in that it was more better in everything and sounded effortless. It was a beefy amp with linear output specifications. Like 75w@8R, 150w@4R and 300w@2R. I attribute the excellent sound to the output linearity and ability to drive the speakers with any load that the speakers put on the amplifier. Granted it is in a another class altogether than what you are looking at but the NAD gear gives it a good go, has more dynamic power output and will be more stable into low impedances than the Yamahas. Perhaps you have golden ears and are cursed with needing better stuff. >@^_*@< The bottom line is in this specific case with the models you are looking at if you want to go Yamaha you'll get more bang for your buck, if you go NAD you'll get a better class of gear with subtle differences in the sound as long as you buy the big NADs and not little ones. I was going to suggest a Yamaha with bigger better speakers although that would probably result in you wanting a NAD anyway to power them.

 

[Doodski]

For me, the way amps are rated in terms of power, is not clear. I read about it, the way they calculate it, it seems to me it’s more marketing than anything else. And indeed, as someone else said here, the 301 may not have more than 50/60wpc with that power supply.

With the specific amps you are looking at the RMS constant power output specs are real. There is no fudging them and the Yamaha is not actually 50-60w/ch. They take the peak voltage output at or before before clipping, multiple it by 0.707 then square the result and divide by the 8 Ohms. They are what they are rated at.

 

[V.b.]

Yamaha has streaming, but NAD is a simple integrated amplifier. What source did you use with NAD?

 

[MarkS]

As i said towards the begining of this thread, i had the opportunity to hear my speakers for about a month driven by my own Yammi 301 and an NAD319. The difference in the sound was quite obvious to me.

Many people have this experience with electronics, but the "obvious" difference in sound vanishes as soon as they listen blind.

 

[linuxfan]

Many people have this experience with electronics, but the "obvious" difference in sound vanishes as soon as they listen blind.

Indeed, that may be true. It's true of some of my acquaintances, and some of my family members. It's clearly true for you, and you would like to align your experience with the "many" thus legitimising your experience and outlook.

But it's also true that "many" people can hear the difference between amplifiers, turntables, and speakers. (I didn't mention DAC's, that's a story for another day). What's interesting is the reaction of those who can't, towards those who can. Some, like my brother, are bemused, but comfortable nonetheless. On the other hand, some are clearly uncomfortable that someone else has an experience which they don't, and wish to disprove or discredit it.

Regarding blind tests, I have done these to some of my friends, in order to dissuade them from purchasing a hifi product that they have a preference for because of the way that it fits in with their decor. Again, some of these friends hear a difference, some don't.
After I changed from one amplifier to another, several friends on different occasions (particularly female) have walked into the room from a different part of the house with the comment "wow, what did you just change?". That's an example of an indirect blind test.

Regarding double-blind tests, these are worthwhile for scientific and medical purposes. If you need to do such a thing for music listening, you have an agenda to push (as above) and maybe should take up another hobby, rather than hifi/music listening.

the "obvious" difference in sound vanishes as soon as they listen blind.

I reiterate that you speak for yourself and the "many" that are like you.