• 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!

Amplifier SINAD list ASR + 3rd parties

Done!
 
Anyone have any thoughts on why the NAD M10 V2 has such a low Sinad (74) and the original M10 is listed as 86. I’m not sure if they use the same nCore module but they both use Sabre DACs. I would have expected a higher Sinad with any nCore.
 
Rhess00 said:
Anyone have any thoughts on why the NAD M10 V2 has such a low Sinad (74) and the original M10 is listed as 86. I’m not sure if they use the same nCore module but they both use Sabre DACs. I would have expected a higher Sinad with any nCore.
Click to expand...
I couldn't find the test of the V2, but the difference may be down to using an analogue input instead of a digital input.
 
welwynnick said:
I couldn't find the test of the V2, but the difference may be down to using an analogue input instead of a digital input.
Click to expand...
This is probably it. Amir saw wild swings in the noise floor using the analog input so he switched to coax. The M10 V2 data was taken from a Soundstage! review and they used the analog input. Thanks
 
I've taken the time to try and break this data down in my own way, mainly rankings. The charts can be automatically updated if the excel source is updated too. Its in the form of a python notebook.

Some things I realised was some brands dominate certain categories with respect to sinad or thd 1% at certain price points. And because there's not many metrics in the source data set, changing the price can have a big impact on the rankings of each chart.
 
I like this list, fun to look at. Funny how the higher into the stratosphere the amp is priced, the lower the SINAD. Not universally, but it sure seems prevalent. Altough in my experience there is a lot more to how an amplifier sounds that pure noise and distortion measurements. I think a looking at both measurements and subjective impressions, the reality is somewhere in the middle. Auditioning and listening to an amp in your system in your room with your speakers is also pretty mandatory when making a final decision whenever possible.

My amp happens to be towards the top of the list on that spreadsheet (NAD-C298), and I'm also very happy with what it's doing in my rig, but I'm sure there are amps out there that "may" not measure as well, and also "may" sound better to my ears. But it's always good to know that your gear also has specs that at least point towards a well engineered piece of equipment.

At any rate, great list. I'll be looking at it regularly.
 
Also, the Cambridge Audio Edge W (the power amp) - appears to have been measured here: https://audioxpress.com/files/attachment/2712

If that could be added please :)

The integrated scored a very respectable 95dB SINAD with Stereophile, so wondering how the SINAD of the W fares against it (should be better?!).
 
3e A5 was already there, Edge W added, thanks.
 
Matias said:
Let me know if you find any mistake.
Click to expand...
Perhaps a tiny tiny correction - maybe it is not a "mistake" but just "imperfection":

The Topping B100 low gain is correct.

B100 Mid gain: it has to be placed to new Nr. 7 (120 db) but the worst 120 db (because it is 119.52 dB)

B100 High gain: it has to placed to new Nr. 9 (118 dB) (because it is 117.6 dB)

So Topping has the complete top ten now.

And THANK YOU SOOOOOOO much for your list. It is simply awesome!
 
Hi totti1965, you are right and I have opened the B100 in its 3 gain levels.

I wonder if I should remove the entries with gain < 20, which are practically unusable in normal hi-fi systems, as they need tons of voltage from the source, something that only pro-audio interfaces and AP signal generators can actually achieve. But I have not decided yet and kept them in there so far.

Edit: awesome is @pierre 's Spinorama.org which I am a fan, that is "real work", mine is just a simple spreadsheet with a few formulas and graphs. :)
 
Matias said:
Hi totti1965, you are right and I have opened the B100 in its 3 gain levels.

I wonder if I should remove the entries with gain < 20, which are practically unusable in normal hi-fi systems, as they need tons of voltage from the source, something that only pro-audio interfaces and AP signal generators can actually achieve. But I have not decided yet and kept them in there so far.

Edit: awesome is @pierre 's Spinorama.org which I am a fan, that is "real work", mine is just a simple spreadsheet with a few formulas and graphs. :)
Click to expand...
And I thought, I was the hugest Spinorama.org fan!!! ;)
 
Ah, and don’t remove anything.
It is fine as it is: It’s a „science“ community, so people know, that they need more voltage to drive amps with just 10 or 15 dB gain….
And there are also many Horn-Loudspeaker-Fans out there……
 
I really like the list, but one thing bothers me... Looking at THD, all harmonics 2nd 3rd 7th etc has the same validation. However.. our brain is overlooking (not so sensitive) to 2nd harmonic as to 7th harmonic. General rule is that odd harmonics is much more disturbing and "hard" than even harmonics. Next parameter is the higher number (more distant from the main signal) is more disturbing. 2nd harmonic is in most cases more or less irrlevant. You can easy verify this with software generated 2nd harmonics to an audio file. Many people has don it already so you can go to some websites and download samples and listen for yourself... up to 1% 2nd harmonic i barely detectable. However, if you add 1% 7th harmonic you want to throw away the headphones. So i´m brain storming here.. would it be possible to at least disregard 2nd harmonic from the others to get a more realistic table. It could be another column in the spreadsheet where 2nd harmonic is removed or at least attenuated in the equation with 10dB?
If you want links to some lossless files 24/96 with comparison with different harmonics I will help out.
Thanks for a great job!!
 
I cannot remove a specific harmonic from the all the measurements, it would be impossible for me to compare different sources this way...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

FanatNsk
SMSL AO10 Bluetooth 5.3 Amplifier - Measurement and Review
Replies
1
Views
958
Hellboy.
Hellboy.
oal
YAMAHA R-N1000A Network Receiver Review
2 3 4
Replies
62
Views
33K
tuiansha
T
dgo42
Phonalyser: free open-source analyzer - THD, SNR/ENOB, frequency response, scope (+ QA40x support)
2 3
Replies
46
Views
2K
dgo42
dgo42
Quinton595
The Seemingly-Awful State of Car Amplifiers .... Does it even matter?
2
Replies
37
Views
3K
10PSPMemSticksForMiku2007
10PSPMemSticksForMiku2007
RandomEar
Cheap and cheerful class D comparison (CCCDC)
2
Replies
34
Views
6K
GGroch
GGroch
Back
Top Bottom