• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

3e audio A7/A7 Mono Amplifier Review

Rate this amplifier:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 4 1.6%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 10 3.9%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 67 26.0%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 177 68.6%

  • Total voters
    258
If the above are true we're talking about a different amp.
There were perfectly ok amps in the past who got ridiculed by the material of the binding posts alone.

We've all known the differences between the pre-production, and production models for a very long time.

@Guddu has a pre-production model, so perhaps they can shed some light on what the actual significance not using a pCB riser for the binding posts has on the performance of the amp (my guess: absolutely none at all).
 
That's not fair play, at all.
And certainly not in line with ASR ethos which some probably use as their advertisement main point.

If the above are true we're talking about a different amp.
There were perfectly ok amps in the past who got ridiculed by the material of the binding posts alone.

Someone has to send Amir a random sample probably and take it from there.
This seems to me to be slightly crazy. The reviewer is raving (positively) about the 3e A7. It's scoring top vs his other reviewed models.

I would cut some slack for variation in testing - what counts is relative to other tests using the same procedure surely. Is this not all getting a little out of hand?

If I have miss interpreted this section of the video I apologize.
The way I see it, 3e doesn't mind plating dirty.

It starts with sending a special model to Amir and other reviewers. Production model is gutted, ripple smoothing daughterboard is removed, pcb to terminate speaker outputs is removed, 10A relay is removed.

I do not think it is fair to keep the review up, it scores a SINAD of 102 in reality what we can buy is a 96 SINAD amp

I still can't believe when I contacted you, your reply was I was looking at the wrong place for the Simic.

You refuse to make apologies and continue with false advertising and treat us as annoying children.
Ditto.
 
We've all known the differences between the pre-production, and production models for a very long time.

@Guddu has a pre-production model, so perhaps they can shed some light on what the actual significance not using a pCB riser for the binding posts has on the performance of the amp (my guess: absolutely none at all).
No one can speculate about the significance unless we measure it.
Are you long enough around here to remember a perfectly nice Hypex amp who got crippled by it's steel connectors to the binding posts?
(company fixed it right away , to their credit, it was an easy fix anyway)

Speculating is not the way we take things here, same with the blanket statements.
 
Are you long enough around here to remember a perfectly nice Hypex amp who got crippled by it's steel connectors to the binding posts?

It would be very useful to have a production unit sent in order to update the review of the amp, I agree with that 100%.

I don't think I was around the forums here for that (if you happen to know the link or can point me in the direction to search myself, I'd love to see).

What do you make of the photograph I took of the caps inside my own unit here:


Are those, in fact, ELNA Silmic II's or a different capacitor type? If they are (I've searched online for images of those caps, and they appear to match what I've photographed), it appears to corroborate what 3e said about user Raiju looking in the wrong spot.
 
It starts with sending a special model to Amir and other reviewers. Production model is gutted, ripple smoothing daughterboard is removed, pcb to terminate speaker outputs is removed, 10A relay is removed.

I do not think it is fair to keep the review up, it scores a SINAD of 102 in reality what we can buy is a 96 SINAD amp

Can this be verified? If this is all true, it gives the impression of deceptive tactics being used by 3E Audio and surely this review should be deemed as void? It would only be fair to customers, other audio companies and the members of this forum.
 
What do you make of the photograph I took of the caps inside my own unit here:


Are those, in fact, ELNA Silmic II's or a different capacitor type? If they are (I've searched online for images of those caps, and they appear to match what I've photographed), it appears to corroborate what 3e said about user Raiju looking in the wrong spot.
They could be, it be useful to know the values so we can verify.
But I don't see a reason why they wouldn't, it's not like the "expensive" high capacitance/voltage ones.

Surely pricier than second tier ones though, specially at a manufacturing scale if they want to save a dollar.
 
> please remove your statement that you use Elna caps from your marketing material. Because as of now, that material is dishonest.

> It works towards damaging the trust your potential customers have in your organisation.

Exactly. Also having a native English speaker proofread and correct your English would help your company image.

I am an English teacher at university level and would be happy to help for free.

What you posted is nearly impossible to understand.

Which is fine except in business gives a poor impression.

i am not going to keep explaince but if someone don't understand and dout it, it is hard to chnage his mind.
we change these 4 cap will save how much? 0.1x4=0.4USD? why we are not change them all?why we are not remove some other the 1000uF buck cap(much high cost)
OPA1656 and OPA1612 are the same in performence and these are depend on supply visibility.

this whole capacitor discussion sounds to me like major nitpicking
Your opinion is irrelevant, the topic is false advertising and also perhaps deception in creating a "golden sample" for Amir's measurement and review.

Just because it is a Chinese outfit does not mean they should not be held to a higher standard when operating globally.

In fact in order to keep a decent reputation, they should be "nitpicky" themselves, strive for perfection in matters of integrity, in order to overcome the usual racist perceptions.
 
Last edited:
> please remove your statement that you use Elna caps from your marketing material. Because as of now, that material is dishonest.

> It works towards damaging the trust your potential customers have in your organisation.

Exactly. Also having a native English speaker proofread and correct your English would help your company image.

I am an English teacher at university level and would be happy to help for free.

What you posted is nearly impossible to understand.

Which is fine except in business gives a poor impression.
So far @3eaudio aren't getting it.
Question is to what extent they see that we see they aren't getting it
 
Separate question

Can anyone vouch that this is a good value deal?

I want to get the maximum power & current version, I assume this is designed for Stereo or can it be bridged so I buy two as monoblocs?

3e Audio Class D TPA3255 1Ch 2Ch High-end HiFi Amplifier Board With FPPB

Or would Fosi V3 Mono be more of a "sure thing" at this point ?

@harkpabst ?
 
It would be very useful to have a production unit sent in order to update the review of the amp, I agree with that 100%.

I don't think I was around the forums here for that (if you happen to know the link or can point me in the direction to search myself, I'd love to see).

What do you make of the photograph I took of the caps inside my own unit here:


Are those, in fact, ELNA Silmic II's or a different capacitor type? If they are (I've searched online for images of those caps, and they appear to match what I've photographed), it appears to corroborate what 3e said about user Raiju looking in the wrong spot.
No I did not look at the wrong spot. Here you can clearly see what caps are supposed to be ELNA

index.php
 
Last edited:
No I did not look at the wrong spot. Here you can clearly see what caps are supposed to be ELNA, I didn't look but I assume the 2 ELNAs at the top right near the single end to balance op amp are gone too. So they went from 10 ELNAs to 4.

index.php
show us the real unit picture please, don't just put your assumpsion here as other will confuse.
 
Can this be verified? If this is all true, it gives the impression of deceptive tactics being used by 3E Audio and surely this review should be deemed as void? It would only be fair to customers, other audio companies and the members of this forum.

The unit tested for this review was a pre-production unit, and has been known to be a pre-production unit for a very long time. IMO, none of it is a secret, and none of it should be a surprise. I sincerely doubt that removing the 12v trigger input (which I assume is the referenced 10A relay), and the PCB riser for the binding posts had any impact on the amp's performance. As far as the daughterboard is concerned, it just looks to me like they removed that part, and moved the components to the main board

3e-audio-a7-430586155.jpg



IMG20250604131119.jpg


Here are the two other threads about this device, and I think most of the discussion in those threads pre-date the release of the production models:

 
The unit tested for this review was a pre-production unit, and has been known to be a pre-production unit for a very long time. IMO, none of it is a secret, and none of it should be a surprise. I sincerely doubt that removing the 12v trigger input (which I assume is the referenced 10A relay), and the PCB riser for the binding posts had any impact on the amp's performance. As far as the daughterboard is concerned, it just looks to me like they removed that part, and moved the components to the main board

View attachment 484741


View attachment 484743

Here are the two other threads about this device, and I think most of the discussion in those threads pre-date the release of the production models:

They removed the daughter board and used the same as what they had on the a5. So no, production model will not test the same as the one Amir tested.

And the signal now travels trough steel with the changed binding post termination.
 
No I did not look at the wrong spot. Here you can clearly see what caps are supposed to be ELNA

Did you bother to look at the cluster of 4 caps in the bottom right corner of that diagram? Because what I've photographed appears to be the ELNA Silmic II caps.
 
Did you bother to look at the cluster of 4 caps in the bottom right corner of that diagram? Because what I've photographed appears to be the ELNA Silmic II caps.
Did I ever say they were changed? That is not what we are talking about here.

In the picture you posted you can clearly see that the caps near the op amps are ELNA.
 
At this photo I see 12 caps who appears to be ELNA Silmic II, horizontal markings and colour are a tell, not sure though as the photo is a little blur (and I didn't ordered them myself from Mouser :p , when it comes to caps of this tier I believe no one! )

(this actual pic is funny as the added OPAs cost more than the whole amp)
 
(this actual pic is funny as the added OPAs cost more than the whole amp)

The photo of the production model with the different op amp is not my own, and mainly used to show that the components from the daughterboard in the pre-production model simply may have been re-allocated to the main board in the production model. 3e can choose to confirm/correct me on that if they want.
 
(this actual pic is funny as the added OPAs cost more than the whole amp)
Which brings up another imoptant point!

3e A7 without PSU is offered for EU customers for around 330€ over Aliexpress while for example Aiyimas A20 which has very similar spec PFFB and 2 x 240W, having in addition sub out + HPF + trigger is just at half the price for around 170€!

1. How is that even possible?
2. How is e3 A7 price justified while offering less for twice the price?
 
Last edited:
The photo of the production model with the different op amp is not my own, and mainly used to show that the components from the daughterboard in the pre-production model simply may have been re-allocated to the main board in the production model. 3e can choose to confirm/correct me on that if they want.
The daughterboard has at least 2 transistors, only 1 made it down.

daughterboard.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom