Benchmark ABH2 Replacement

[MAB]

@Joesax
You have one of the best amps ever made. It will last a lifetime. It will drive almost any speaker ever made with negligible / inaudible interactions with the speaker's impedance. I used to sell them, and congratulate you.

It will sound the same as any other competent amplifier.
Perhaps if you had a pair of Scintilla, you might be able to tell the Accuphase from another amp.
Or if you had a broken or poorly designed amp to compare it to. Or another amp with elevated noise floor.

This has been shown many times, by both skeptics and believers. For instance, page 78 is a classic test:

https://americanradiohistory.com/Archive-HiFI-Stereo/80s/HiFi-Stereo-Review-1987-01.pdf

I sold many of these, including the Levinson, but not the Futterman (darn). The test results didn't surprise me when they came out, despite the store I was working in, or actually because of the store...
The rest of the mag is a fun read, brings back lots of memories.

Regarding people with allegedly good hearing and perception:

Audio Listening Test That Fooled the Hollywood Sapphire Group

Some of the most highly trained audiophiles in the industry were asked to do a blind “A-B” listening comparison test of two audio circuits. Were they able to hear a difference, or were they fooled?

www.audioholics.com

AES has a good summary of the inability of humans to hear differences in properly operating amps across a range of prices and types:

Catalogue of blind tests

Do partially-sighted speaker faceoffs tally well with blind test results? If they can be shown to tally well then we we can trust many comparisons - anyone can do a face off (and many do...), while blind tests are too tricky for most to attempt. Example: Audio Musings by Sean Olive A blog...

www.audiosciencereview.com

People hear night and day differences, until they try to actually hear a difference under reasonably controlled conditions.

I can't emphasize how nice the amp you have is. Aside from Bryston you will not find an amp with as good reliability and support.

 

[DVDdoug]

The inability by some here to even consider that different high quality amplifiers can sound different is puzzling to me.

Of course they CAN. But if there is a difference in a proper blind ABX test,, it's most likely noise.

Distortion and frequency response are usually better than human hearing (with modern solid-state electronics). With electronics, those are the ONLY 3 REAL characteristics of "sound quality". These days it's cheap & easy to make electronics that's better than human hearing. With speakers and acoustics there are a couple of other factors. See Audiophoolery.

 

[voodooless]

The inability by some here to even consider that different high quality amplifiers can sound different is puzzling to me. As I mentioned I've been an"Audiophile" for 40+ years and along the way have owned or auditioned numerous components. So I have a very discerning ear when it comes to music and components. I'm also a musician and can hear when recordings and equipment render instruments correctly.

The willingness to spend thousands of dollars on equipment and not use controls to properly compare them is puzzling to me. Some 60+ year audiophiles think house fuses have an impact on sound or some strange contraptions that you stick on your equipment. It's hardly an argument from authority... Neither is being a musician. We know from research that musicians are nowhere near as well as trained listeners in comparing audio equipment (though better than the general public). I think they usually overestimate their abilities (but also almost all audiophiles do, too, so nothing new there).

 

[KellenVancouver]

As the original poster I would like to comment on the responses.

The inability by some here to even consider that different high quality amplifiers can sound different is puzzling to me. As I mentioned I've been an"Audiophile" for 40+ years and along the way have owned or auditioned numerous components. So I have a very discerning ear when it comes to music and components. I'm also a musician and can hear when recordings and equipment render instruments correctly. Amps in particular do impose their sound characteristics on a system. After a week now of extended listening I can say that the Accuphase amplifier I own is clearly superior to the Benchmark AHB2. I'm intimately familiar with the AHB2 having listened to it intently for the past 3 and half years. Whether you choose to believe that is possible or not is immaterial to me. It has nothing to do with volume matching or any other suggestion. It's just a superior sounding amp. In my system. I say that because it's possible that my system has the resolving characteristics to allow me to hear these differences. Now what is my system:

Harbeth C7ES-XD Speakers
Aurender N20 Streamer
MSB Discrete DAC
Accuphase P-4600 Amplifier
No special upgraded power cords
Fairly inexpensive but quality interconnects and other cables

Each of these components when added improved the SQ. With these components and the AHB2 the sound and presentation was excellent. It is an excellent amp. However the Accuphase has clearly elevated my system to a level I had not thought possible. I wasn't expecting this much of an improvement over the AHB2 but it is easily heard by me and confirms the SQ and presentation I heard in my auditions prior to purchase. Is it expensive? Yes. Is it worth it to me? Yes. I've been re-listening to all of my favorite recordings and am overjoyed with the presentation and SQ. I can't believe how fortunate I am to be able to get to this level of sound reproduction finally after a life long pursuit. So if you have an AHB2 take it to a reputable audio store and compare it to some of the high quality amps from Bryston, Macintosh, Pass and Accuphase and then let your ears decide.

Marginal utility of value. In other words, if you have the means, and it makes you happier, then you're doing well. We should all be happy that you've found your happy place.

 

[pjug]

The willingness to spend thousands of dollars on equipment and not use controls to properly compare them is puzzling to me. Some 60+ year audiophiles think house fuses have an impact on sound or some strange contraptions that you stick on your equipment. It's hardly an argument from authority... Neither is being a musician. We know from research that musicians are nowhere near as well as trained listeners in comparing audio equipment (though better than the general public). I think they usually overestimate their abilities (but also almost all audiophiles do, too, so nothing new there).

Whether or not this applies here I think the OP got a nice amp and I am kind of jealous!

 

[Joesax]

Keith
First, the Accuphase 270 was their entry level integrated from years ago so no valid comparison here. Accuphase has continued to improve price/performance since its beginning. It's been replaced by the 280.

In my opinion your insistence on the sound quality difference of the Accuphase being distortion only is based on your objective dogma bias. The distortion measurements of Accuphase products are always below the level where they can be heard or affect the actual sound. They are typically quoted at full output which we rarely if ever attain so the measurements are even lower. And Accuphase always underestimate the performance. The numbers quoted are what they guaranty. As I mentioned it sounded wonderful when I auditioned it which is before I bought it and had no expectation or bias as to how it would sound. And I auditioned it with similar speakers from Harbeth. On the contrary I was hoping it would not sound significantly better because there were less expensive options.

So just go out and listen to different amps with everything else in the system unchanged. If your buying your audio from Best Buy or Amazon certainly go by measurements. If you are looking for quality audio components like Bryston, Macintosh, Accuphase, Pass, Yamaha, etc., please use you own ears. They all offer exceptional specifications and sound different and not because they are typically exposing you to some distortion tuning.

Anyway here's an interesting question:
Let's say there are two amps you are considering in the same system. One has the best measurements you have ever seen and sounds great.
The other also measures exceptionally well but dose not quite meet the measurements of the first but sounds superior to the first.
You believe that the sound difference and subjective improvement of the second has to do with some distortion tuning.
For the sake of this example they are the same price.
Which one do you buy? And why?

 

[pjug]

It would be really interesting to simultaneously record one channel each from both of these amps and compare them in DeltaWave. My understanding is that both go almost to DC so the high-pass filter problem might not be much of an issue.

 

[voodooless]

Let's say there are two amps you are considering in the same system. One has the best measurements you have ever seen and sounds great.
The other also measures exceptionally well but dose not quite meet the measurements of the first but sounds superior to the first.
You believe that the sound difference and subjective improvement of the second has to do with some distortion tuning.

He didn't say that. He offered multiple possible explanations....

For the sake of this example they are the same price.
Which one do you buy? And why?

How about neither, at least until we can figure out if the perceived difference is real in the first place?

 

[DSJR]

Specs are one thing measurements another, my point was that two amplifiers without audible distortion will sound identical if they can both properly drive the loudspeaker in question.
Keith

Yet for some reason, Accuphase amps as a breed seem to have a silky velvet kind of 'tone' in the systems I've heard them used in. I don't think it's especially natural, as real-live-instruments, especially brass and drums, can HURT with their intensity, even allowing for the dilution that comes when recording and mixing them, but it's damned alluring...

Irrespective of the 'sound' these amps may or may not add to the proceedings, Accuphase gear LOOKS so beautiful if presented singly (and common as muck displayed in quantity on a trestle table as I saw a few years back at a local show ). We all should know how important 'eye'fi' is to audiophiles, even if they deny it

Anyway, my suggestion would have been to buy another Benchmark amp and bridge them!!! FAR more power available then and still able to drive lowish impedance loads I believe. I love the C7-XD version (hated the previous ones) and again, a change to the current SHL5+-XD (which now sounds like a bigger version of the current C7-XD) might have been something to consider.

I'll put my 'dealer hat' back into retirement now. Enjoy, whatever

 

[pablolie]

Keith
First, the Accuphase 270 was their entry level integrated from years ago so no valid comparison here. Accuphase has continued to improve price/performance since its beginning. It's been replaced by the 280.

In my opinion your insistence on the sound quality difference of the Accuphase being distortion only is based on your objective dogma bias. The distortion measurements of Accuphase products are always below the level where they can be heard or affect the actual sound.

As a former (and enthusiastic) Accuphase user, I never made the point that Accuphase stuff doesn't measure extremely competently. It does. And it is built beautifully. And I do believe the visual and tactile element does play a role in audio enjoyment.

If you enjoy the sound of your new amp more, hey, awesome - that's all that matters in our hobby.

Would I personally go out on a limb claiming I could hear a difference between the Accuphase 306v, the NAD M22 and the AHB2? No, I think they all sounded spot on. The differences were in feature sets, size and looks. I always prefer integrated in the end. But the E-306v was simply too big and the DAC board was a bit long in the tooth (although still sounded great).

My key convictions are:

1. Any amp with competent measurements will sound great these days.
2. With that in mind, go buy whatever makes you happy.
3. It's impossible to prove to anyone what you think you hear in your home audio shrine, so those discussions are always unrewarding.

 

[Joesax]

My intent has not been to convince anyone of anything. Just wanted to state that for me I have found a better amp than the Benchmark and that if you own the Benchmark and wonder if it can be bettered it can in my experience. Whether this is a result of the designer tuning the amp in some way is immaterial to me since it just sounds better and more to my liking in every way.

 

[shuppatsu]

My intent has not been to convince anyone of anything. Just wanted to state that for me I have found a better amp than the Benchmark and that if you own the Benchmark and wonder if it can be bettered it can in my experience. Whether this is a result of the designer tuning the amp in some way is immaterial to me since it just sounds better and more to my liking in every way.

We have so many threads like this. The original responses were extremely diplomatic, perhaps uncommonly so for this site due to the mention of your wife's passing. But eventually, the "objective dogma" (as you put it) of this site was bound to make an appearance. It's fine, you can ignore it and just engage with the people congratulating you on your wonderful new amp.

We don't doubt that any amp can't be bettered in a person's sighted subjective experience. We are humans. To be human is to experience differences when there are none. That's why double-blind testing is so crucially important in medicine, wine, and audio.

There's a good argument to be made that we never listen to music blind, except under artificial circumstances. Our subjective experiences are our own reality. If the Accuphase sounds better to you there's little point in switching back to the Benchmark just because you can't disprove the contention of a bunch of strangers on the internet. But that only extends as far as you and your own experience. It doesn't apply to anyone else, and here at ASR we try to privilege the objective over the subjective.

 

[Purité Audio]

Keith
First, the Accuphase 270 was their entry level integrated from years ago so no valid comparison here. Accuphase has continued to improve price/performance since its beginning. It's been replaced by the 280.

In my opinion your insistence on the sound quality difference of the Accuphase being distortion only is based on your objective dogma bias. The distortion measurements of Accuphase products are always below the level where they can be heard or affect the actual sound. They are typically quoted at full output which we rarely if ever attain so the measurements are even lower. And Accuphase always underestimate the performance. The numbers quoted are what they guaranty. As I mentioned it sounded wonderful when I auditioned it which is before I bought it and had no expectation or bias as to how it would sound. And I auditioned it with similar speakers from Harbeth. On the contrary I was hoping it would not sound significantly better because there were less expensive options.

So just go out and listen to different amps with everything else in the system unchanged. If your buying your audio from Best Buy or Amazon certainly go by measurements. If you are looking for quality audio components like Bryston, Macintosh, Accuphase, Pass, Yamaha, etc., please use you own ears. They all offer exceptional specifications and sound different and not because they are typically exposing you to some distortion tuning.

Anyway here's an interesting question:
Let's say there are two amps you are considering in the same system. One has the best measurements you have ever seen and sounds great.
The other also measures exceptionally well but dose not quite meet the measurements of the first but sounds superior to the first.
You believe that the sound difference and subjective improvement of the second has to do with some distortion tuning.
For the sake of this example they are the same price.
Which one do you buy? And why?

The very first step is to determine whether there is an actual difference ( if both measure below the threshold of audibility) and for that you have to compare level matched and unsighted.
It is very easy to believe you hear a difference when in fact there is none.
Keith

 

[Hear Here]

As the original poster I would like to comment on the responses.

The inability by some here to even consider that different high quality amplifiers can sound different is puzzling to me. As I mentioned I've been an"Audiophile" for 40+ years and along the way have owned or auditioned numerous components. So I have a very discerning ear when it comes to music and components. I'm also a musician and can hear when recordings and equipment render instruments correctly. Amps in particular do impose their sound characteristics on a system. After a week now of extended listening I can say that the Accuphase amplifier I own is clearly superior to the Benchmark AHB2. I'm intimately familiar with the AHB2 having listened to it intently for the past 3 and half years. Whether you choose to believe that is possible or not is immaterial to me. It has nothing to do with volume matching or any other suggestion. It's just a superior sounding amp. In my system. I say that because it's possible that my system has the resolving characteristics to allow me to hear these differences. Now what is my system:

Harbeth C7ES-XD Speakers
Aurender N20 Streamer
MSB Discrete DAC
Accuphase P-4600 Amplifier
No special upgraded power cords
Fairly inexpensive but quality interconnects and other cables

Each of these components when added improved the SQ. With these components and the AHB2 the sound and presentation was excellent. It is an excellent amp. However the Accuphase has clearly elevated my system to a level I had not thought possible. I wasn't expecting this much of an improvement over the AHB2 but it is easily heard by me and confirms the SQ and presentation I heard in my auditions prior to purchase. Is it expensive? Yes. Is it worth it to me? Yes. I've been re-listening to all of my favorite recordings and am overjoyed with the presentation and SQ. I can't believe how fortunate I am to be able to get to this level of sound reproduction finally after a life long pursuit. So if you have an AHB2 take it to a reputable audio store and compare it to some of the high quality amps from Bryston, Macintosh, Pass and Accuphase and then let your ears decide.

I have to agree with you on most of your observations.

I've owned both the AHB2 and the Accuphase A-36. I'm not sure how your Accuphase compares, but for my money, the A-36 sounded better than the rather uninspiring AHB2 - by a significant margin - same experience as yours. However, I auditioned amps better than either when looking for a great amp for my Avantgarde speakers. The Benchmark, despite its excellent measurements and very low noise was amongst the least rewarding as far as the pleasure it gave to listeners.

The Accuphase was rather nicer, both in its features and looks as well as sound. I kept it for a year or so while also auditioning other amps. The A-36 was a little too "polite" for my linking. A GamuT D200 Mk III offered a better listening experience, though it had nasty habits when powered up or down - a hefty thump through my 107 dB speakers. I chose in the end, the NAD Master Series M33 with its Purifi Eigentakt-based amplifier. If you are looking for an amp that offers a rewarding listening experience, can I suggest you audition the NAD M33 (if you want an all-in-one), or it's power amp only sibling, the M23. These are a significant step up from their predecessors, the M32 and M22 that used less good Class D technology.

 

[Joesax]

As I said my only intent as a Benchmark owner was to say I have found something that in my system and experience is better all things being equal. I’m not trying to convince others. And I only mentioned the objective dogma issue when it was said I was experiencing cognitive bias, distortion etc., and that in someway what I was hearing is a delusion. Objective measurements are important and have an important place in technically comparing components. I used them and this site to originally purchase my Benchmark stack(amp, preamp and DAC). After going out and auditioning alternatives I have replaced each with something that to my ears is substantially better.

 

[Purité Audio]

Cognitive bias is extremely powerful and of course rarely discussed.
The Accuphase amp might be adding audible distortion but I doubt that, for comparisons to be truly valid they have to be level matched and unsighted.
Keith

 

[Mnyb]

The only thing the benchmark has against it is the relatively limited power of 100w 8 ohm that migth not always be enough.

the caveat about well engineered amps sounds the same is that they are driven within thier comfort zone . no clipping or other misbehaviours .
extensive hiss and noise can be a “tell” but neither of these amps should be a problem.

but it is unknowable to us if one amp under your typical load actually stresses one amp and don’t the other ,then they indeed sound different.
but no one can guess that from afar .

 

[Joesax]

Keith

Here’s the way I compare when auditioning new equipment.

I have a reference recording. It’s Britten’s Young People’s Guide To the Orchestra on Telarc. I’ve listened to this work so many times for the last 10 years I’ve lost track. I know every second of this recording intimately and have used it as a reference for years. With high quality streaming I can listen to it at any audio store. It’s about a 12 minute piece and covers every instrument in the orchestra. I can within the first few minutes tell what if any differences there are in the presentation vs what I hear at home. Or the differences between two components I am comparing. It has worked flawlessly for me. The recording is my control. I have a few other reference recordings I use as well for voice.

Also when you have listened to a system at home for an extensive time you become very familiar with its overall presentation and SQ. Especially with that recording. So when you swap out a component in your system any change is easy to discern. Also I have to mention using some compressed pop or rock recording as reference probably won’t do. You need an excellent recording with a very good dynamic range.

 

[Timcognito]

Let's share placebo effect anecdotes!

One of the challenges the "objectivist community" has is some refuse to believe that they could be affected by cognitive biases in hearing*. Some people are, but not them!. The idea is that somehow knowledge of the effects, or lots of listening experience immunizes them. If only it were so...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Platypus20]

So now I have sell my ABH2s ??? <sigh>