Advice on integrated amp for Wharfedale Diamonds 230

[gasolin75]

im talking about aound quality, power difference is under 3db

 

[Doodski]

The yamaha amp won't beat the Rotel A11 Tribute, thanks for watching

The A11 Tribute is another small amplifier with big aspirations stated in the literature. As a example we have a peep here that bought into one of these overpriced 45-50W/ch amps and it doesn't come close to his 80W/ch amp with his speakers. Both are high current but the smaller amp just doesn't have the power supply hardware to deliver the goods at louder output levels and when the bass hits and is increased. The Yamaha has a much larger capacity transformer, bigger power supply caps with much more DC voltage at the rails. It's simple physics that the Yamaha is going to be better. That and the price of the Rotel is steep for what a person is getting. The Rotel is $1099.00 in Canada and that's pretty expensive for what it is. The Yamaha is $1000 in Canada and offers much more.

 

[gasolin75]

Rotel a11 tribute cost in uk £499 equal to 869 canadian dollars

The amp Is more than decent

 

[Doodski]

Rotel a11 tribute cost in uk £499 equal to 869 canadian dollars

The amp Is more than decent

I checked 7 etailers in Canada and all are $1099.00 but UK £499 is better. I still think it's overhyped and overpriced.

 

[UniPolar]

@brotakul I vote for the Yamaha - if only because I have owned several and they have been as reliable as I would ever want.

You may get better bang/buck if you purchase something on the used market, but then you may not have a warranty..

Even though this site is focused on measurement of equipment , you'll still find people making bold claims ( 'eats xxx for lunch, etc. ).
And if someone has had a failure, you'll read to avoid that amp 'like the plague', etc., so tread carefully through the quagmire .....
I'm not suggestng every amp sounds identical, but the differences are 'over amplified' IMO....

I've had multiple amps over the years, and can't truly say there's been one that really stood out over the other.. Or one that was a POS.
( OK, the cheap 'system' I had ( Sounddesign ?) back in the 60's was bad by any measure..)
But that's me and the measurements I see here tend to confirm that any differences found in today's equipment is difficult for MOST people to hear - if at all..

GL

 

[Doodski]

Even though this site is focused on measurement of equipment , you'll still find people making bold claims ( 'eats xxx for lunch, etc. ).

Lol.. it was me that stated,
"The Yamaha is a nice design, has the ToP Art layout, more than maybe ~double the heatsink area, 4 output transistors per channel versus 2 per channel on the Rotel and the Yamaha generally will eat that Rotel for breakfast (Techy jargon). "

In this specific case the Yamaha has double the power output of the Rotel in question when even/matching specs are applied. That will make a difference.

 

[brotakul]

All I can say on the subject is that for the past 15 years I owned Diamonds 8.4 (which are not the same as yours but close) and a NAD C372 (which again is just one generation over a C370 in your options)… And I really like the tandem!

Despite also having a number of more modern components (and significantly more expensive… though sometimes significantly less expensive too, eg an Aiyima A07 class D amp for $70), the Wharfedales/NAD are still heavily used and loved. And, while in a slightly smaller room, they are a worthy competition to their bigger siblings - Diamonds 11.5 and NAD 375BEE - so, sometimes I even prefer (like equally?) their sound (with some Roon-assisted room EQ’ing).

NAD C372:
- 2 x 150W Minimum Continuous Power into 4/8 ohms,
- 220W, 340W, 460W IHF Dynamic Power into 8, 4 and 2ohms, respectively

[Replaced power-supply capacitors and op-amps in my C372 4-5 years ago though.]

Just my $0.02.

The reason I listed the NAD here: recently had the opportunity to test a friend’s NAD 319 in my setup, with the Wharfedales, and the impression was quite strong. To my ears, the NAD was fuller and more clear in the mids (vocals, guitar, which I love as I listen to blues a lot), the bass seemed to be tighter (less boomy) and cleaner (more articulate maybe?) and the presentation was more forward, as in, while with the R-N301 the sound is more or less in line with the baffle, with the NAD was projected more in front of the speakers and closer to me. That’s the “feeling” I had, the best I can describe it in this “audiophile” jargon.

Compared to the NAD, the 301 sounds still clean, but very flat, uninvolving, like is lacking in the dynamics department.

Now, I don’t know whether this was because of the difference in power between the amps (and maybe not the nominal wpc but having more to do with power supply max output, more capacitance in the power level, etc - not an electro guy here..), but the NAD just felt it had a lot more grunt.

Or maybe it just has to do with the “voicing” of the amp, I don’t know. It’s the only “other” amp i tested on my speakers, so I don’t have a good reference to compare. Hence me posting here about the subject

 

[Doodski]

The reason I listed the NAD here: Inrecently had the opportunity to test a friend’s NAD 319 in my setup, with the Wharfedales, and the impression was quite strong.

The NAD 319 takes it to the next level up compared to the Yamahas you've mentioned. The NAD 319 has 8 output transistors per channel, more power supply capacitance, a higher rated mains transformer, better components like capacitors and generally is designed better all around. It should sound a little better. Not leaps and bounds but a little bit better.

• 2 x 125 Watts continuous power into 8 ohms
• 2 x 400 Watts dynamic power into 2 ohms
• Bridgeable: 400 Watts into 8 ohms

 

[brotakul]

From what i can find online, the C370 replaced the 319 and it is considered/described as an improvement over the 319 (and some say it’s even a better package overall when compared to the even newer C372 model).
It’s an alternative on the list, for a much lower price than a new amp like the R-N803d.

 

[Doodski]

C370

The NAD C370 has 6 output transistors per channel, more power supply capacitance up to 20,000 micro Farad per voltage rail and higher dynamic power output.

 

[brotakul]

So how would you rate the two? Do the fewer transistors make a significant difference?

 

[Doodski]

So how would you rate the two? Do the fewer transistors make a significant difference?

In this case the two NADS are close in RMS power output. The C370 seems to have refined everything a little bit. The 6 transistors compared to 8 might indicate more current capacity although without looking up the transistor part numbers and checking their specs the actual difference is a unknown at this time. I think either would be a nice piece.

 

[Doodski]

NAD 319 @ 8 power transistors/ch - 2SC3519 & 2SA1386 , 15A each, 130W each.

NAD C370 @ 6 power transistors/ch - 2SC5200 & 2SA1943, 15A each, 150Watts each

 

[Doodski]

The NAD 370 has a +/- 64VDC main power supply powering those transistors that drive the speakers.
The NAD C319 has a +/- 60VDC main power supply powering those transistors that drive the speakers.

 

[VintageFlanker]

https://www.hifinews.com/content/rotel-cd11a11-tribute-cd-playerintegrated-amplifer

SoundStage produced AP measurements of the A11 Tribute, which are much more relevant: https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/i...ts&catid=97:amplifier-measurements&Itemid=154

Very good integrated for sure (power being way over specifications) but it won't beat the Yam 803 on the bench.

Romania

I guess you've already considered this, but I'm sure you may get your 803D shipped from Germany, France or Spain for cheaper than 1K€.

 

[Galliardist]

I suppose considering the speakers isn't out of the question?
Diamond 230 – WHARFEDALE
It looks similar to some other Diamond models, I can't find independent measurements for this one
Rated [email protected]/m. That's in the same sort of range as a number of other Diamond models which are often measured at around 2dB/W less at 1W/m, so not unreasonable to use 86 as the "real" number
Minimum impedence 3.7Ohm. I'd assume this number is probably correct, since it agrees with the measured output of similar Diamond models.

From the original post we may be looking for a peak output in the 85-90dB range, maybe more for comfort, at 3m.

Where does that leave us? Something like 150W into 4 ohms with enough current to go a bit lower? Several of the amps mentioned here would be plenty good enough for this. I'd look for a bit more.

 

[brotakul]

I suppose considering the speakers isn't out of the question?
Diamond 230 – WHARFEDALE
It looks similar to some other Diamond models, I can't find independent measurements for this one
Rated [email protected]/m. That's in the same sort of range as a number of other Diamond models which are often measured at around 2dB/W less at 1W/m, so not unreasonable to use 86 as the "real" number
Minimum impedence 3.7Ohm. I'd assume this number is probably correct, since it agrees with the measured output of similar Diamond models.

From the original post we may be looking for a peak output in the 85-90dB range, maybe more for comfort, at 3m.

Where does that leave us? Something like 150W into 4 ohms with enough current to go a bit lower? Several of the amps mentioned here would be plenty good enough for this. I'd look for a bit more.

I'm not actually considering changing the speakers, I like them. Just looking for a decent amp to pair with, as good as the budget allows.

 

[Roland]

I had the Diamond 230s until recently and the tweeters are just wonderful to listen to - very smooth and detailed but not fatiguing. They’re generally very laid back speakers and I don’t think a different amp will change that (I had them driven by a Yamaha R-N500 receiver and later a Denon AVR-X7200). If you want more attack and forward presentation (more “hifi” sounding!) you’ll have to change speakers, I’m afraid. However, I get the sense that you like how the 230s sound, so forget about upgrade-itis and enjoy the music!

 

[Galliardist]

I'm not actually considering changing the speakers, I like them. Just looking for a decent amp to pair with, as good as the budget allows.

That wasn't what I meant. Rather, nobody here appeared to have quoted the specs or any figures for the speakers, only amps. So I tried to do the sums for your speakers. (I may have overestimated the power requirement at a second glance, but we're in the range of the replacement amps suggested here, so nothing lost).

 

[Willem]

As I said earlier, I honestly do not think there is much to be gained without spending really big. The only exception could be and probbaly is some kind of dsp eq. The simplest and most affordable one would be to measure in-room response with a UMIK-1 and then apply an REW correction curve using a minidsp 2x4 HD: https://www.minidsp.com/products/minidsp-in-a-box/minidsp-2x4-hd.