-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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!
Benchmark HPA4 based on THX AAA Amplifier
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
FourT6and2
Member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2019
- Messages
- 80
- Likes
- 57
All four of their DAC3 models are the same, save for the inclusion or removal of a built-in headphone amp and some additional ins/outs. So why not do the same with the headphone amp? They have FOUR versions of the DAC3. One version of the HPA4. Makes sense to me that they'd offer a barebones headphone amp sans preamp, etc. But hey, whatdoiknow.
FourT6and2
Member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2019
- Messages
- 80
- Likes
- 57
True but it is, obviously, more than just a headphone amp. In fact, I see useful savings in eliminating the headphone amp portion.
lol touché
FourT6and2
Member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2019
- Messages
- 80
- Likes
- 57
Oh I didn't know this thing was available for review yet, thanks for the link!
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2018
- Messages
- 3,740
- Likes
- 6,454
Benchmark never seemed to me to be an opportunistic company in their pricing. In fact, I'm surprised they haven't raised their prices on products. Especially their power amplifier. I mean, it's so far gone compared to what anyone else is doing...
Their headphone/preamp is not cheap. By a long shot. But compared to the high-end headphone market, is it expensive? It knocks the socks off of competing products by any measure, so you can't say that it is overpriced, or snake-oil. If you can afford it and want/need something like it, you probably can't do better. You could do worse for more. You could get close for less.
Last edited:
Expensive? Yes
Overpriced? A bit
Snake oil? A bit
Technically impressive? Yes
It's not black or white. Benchmark had their reputation so pricing was part of the competency. And in many ways tho objectively better, doesn't have real benefits. It certainly serves as snake oil for some people as they cum over the specs. Good engineering does worth the price. It's just depends on the people.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2018
- Messages
- 3,740
- Likes
- 6,454
Where's the snake oil? What part of it is bogus nonsense?
You might think it is overpriced, but it's the best out there. So until someone comes out with something better for less, how is it 'overpriced'?
Why the weird sexual analogies? What is that about?
What why I said 'a bit'.
How much audible improvements from such product over say atom? True that many features and highest performance is lacking but how much?
That's not an analogy. Because I love good specs, I design headphone amplifiers as well, I have my brain gain set to max when I listen to amps with -130db distortion into load.
Same if not better performance can be made for much lower price. thx 789 is out there and thx 887 and smsl sp200 are coming. There will even be something even cheaper and better next year. Hence a bit overpriced to say at least.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2018
- Messages
- 3,740
- Likes
- 6,454
I didn't know decent engineering equates even to a 'bit' of snake oil.
Look, I'm not saying anyone can hear a difference in specs between this engine and something less rigorous. I'm just sayin' it's out there, if anyone needs it. Or thinks they need it.When I think of snake oil I'm thinking of plogiston-free green- kryptonite directional ethernet cables, and such. Things that have no real basis in solid engineering.
I agree, the 'problem' with a company like Benchmark, is that eventually someone will come out with something equivalent, or better, at a lower price point. Once that happens... Until that happens...
Like I explained in the first post. The snake oil thing isn't intended from benchmark side. It's from the consumer side. Theoretically, there is no need to have such good performance for audio products. But in practice there is the need hence why there's benchmark along with other sota manufacturers. For them, it doesn't necessarily sound better but feels better about having a great performance. To some extent, that's snake oil. Not that it's a bad thing. It's not full of snake oil. It's supported by better objective performance so nothing wrong with it.I didn't know decent engineering equates even to a 'bit' of snake oil.
When I think of snake oil I'm thinking of plogiston-free green- kryptonite directional ethernet cables, and such. Things that have no real basis in solid engineering.
I agree, the 'problem' with a company like Benchmark, is that eventually someone will come out with something equivalent, or better, at a lower price point. Once that happens... Until that happens...
What is it that you believe to hear in differences between these two excellent measuring units?
Oh i read it as unnoticeable......
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2018
- Messages
- 3,740
- Likes
- 6,454
The combination of low distortion and high power (both characteristics of the Benchmark HPA and, for that matter, AHB amplifier) are routinely described as a 'subjective' improvement in the loudness department. Is it in fact the case? I have experienced it with my own Benchmark gear, where I am able to play and enjoy my speakers louder than hitherto, than was the case with other electronics. I am not going to state that I could identify my... I'll call it an impression rather than an objective phenomenon, in a DBT. I'd like to try, but I have no means to set up the experiment. FWIW, I have sensitive speakers, so I am not coming close to amp's capability.
What of lower sensitivity speakers? Or headphones requiring a lot of power? How does the combination of low distortion and power affect listening?
The late Peter Aczel told me that that high level distortion (mostly in loudspeakers) is the major factor of listening fatigue (not counting bad recordings), making one reach for the volume control to 'turn it down'. This of course is not controversial. He said that if you had distortion free loudspeakers (as distortion free as amps), then you'd probably be listening at ear damaging levels, without even recognizing it.
I recently came across a (04/72) Stereo Review test of the then newer 'high powered' consumer oriented amplifiers. Hitherto, a 50 to 60 watt/channel amp was considered beefy, 100 watts a rare luxury. Using the newly released AR LST speaker (a low sensitivity device capable of absorbing beaucoup power for short periods without severely distorting --looking sort of like three AR3a speakers combined in one box) Julian Hirsch measured and listened to the Crown DC-300; C/M 911; Maranz 250; Sony TA-3200; and Phase Linear 700.
Of the regular bunch, the Crown was strongest, with an 'over the top' Phase Linear shaming all [460 watts/ch/8 ohms short-term bursts. Hirsch was not able to report 4 ohm bursts due to limitations in his test set up, however, when asked, Bob Carver stated that his amp could pump out around 730 short-term watts/ch into 4]. Distortion figures at either high power or low milliwatts was very low (interestingly, Phase Linear had both the highest power and lowest distortion at 10 milliwatts).
Certain findings surprised the reviewers. On wide dynamic range music the most powerful amp was clipping more than the other amps. Why? Because they were asking more of it. The AR speakers absorbed all the amp's massive power, so they tended to 'keep turning it up' while listening. But the other amps could not play as loud without distorting, so they didn't use them full bore. With the Phase Linear, as they turned it up (average outputs of 30+ watts/ch) the low sensitivity speakers came to life; alternately, at these average power levels, musical peaks were routinely clipping the amplifier.
To conclude the review, Hirsch wrote: The Phase Linear brochure asks , "Why 700 watts?" ...we dismissed this as sheer hyperbole...now it seems quite conservative. We wonder if 700 watts is enough?
What of lower sensitivity speakers? Or headphones requiring a lot of power? How does the combination of low distortion and power affect listening?
The late Peter Aczel told me that that high level distortion (mostly in loudspeakers) is the major factor of listening fatigue (not counting bad recordings), making one reach for the volume control to 'turn it down'. This of course is not controversial. He said that if you had distortion free loudspeakers (as distortion free as amps), then you'd probably be listening at ear damaging levels, without even recognizing it.
I recently came across a (04/72) Stereo Review test of the then newer 'high powered' consumer oriented amplifiers. Hitherto, a 50 to 60 watt/channel amp was considered beefy, 100 watts a rare luxury. Using the newly released AR LST speaker (a low sensitivity device capable of absorbing beaucoup power for short periods without severely distorting --looking sort of like three AR3a speakers combined in one box) Julian Hirsch measured and listened to the Crown DC-300; C/M 911; Maranz 250; Sony TA-3200; and Phase Linear 700.
Of the regular bunch, the Crown was strongest, with an 'over the top' Phase Linear shaming all [460 watts/ch/8 ohms short-term bursts. Hirsch was not able to report 4 ohm bursts due to limitations in his test set up, however, when asked, Bob Carver stated that his amp could pump out around 730 short-term watts/ch into 4]. Distortion figures at either high power or low milliwatts was very low (interestingly, Phase Linear had both the highest power and lowest distortion at 10 milliwatts).
Certain findings surprised the reviewers. On wide dynamic range music the most powerful amp was clipping more than the other amps. Why? Because they were asking more of it. The AR speakers absorbed all the amp's massive power, so they tended to 'keep turning it up' while listening. But the other amps could not play as loud without distorting, so they didn't use them full bore. With the Phase Linear, as they turned it up (average outputs of 30+ watts/ch) the low sensitivity speakers came to life; alternately, at these average power levels, musical peaks were routinely clipping the amplifier.
To conclude the review, Hirsch wrote: The Phase Linear brochure asks , "Why 700 watts?" ...we dismissed this as sheer hyperbole...now it seems quite conservative. We wonder if 700 watts is enough?
I say that because I own them, have blind tested it and have blind tested it with non audiophiles. Everyone could tell the hpa4 amp section was superior. The rme didn't sound bad, but something about the hpa4's amp section just sounds better in almost every category.
Not to mention objective measurements that back that up.
I think a lot of people wonder how well humans can hear these differences. After getting the hpa4 i know believe our hearing may be better than a lot of people think or at least the way the brain processes it.
Not to mention objective measurements that back that up.
I think a lot of people wonder how well humans can hear these differences. After getting the hpa4 i know believe our hearing may be better than a lot of people think or at least the way the brain processes it.
We'd be very interested in the conditions of your "blind" tests, gear used for switching, how closely levels were matched, all the details.
Also the results of your testing with different listeners, rates of correct ID's etc. How do you determine which was "better" sounding vs just different?
Used a db meter to level the volume of the headphones and would have people test the amp section's "blind." I would then ask which sounds better.
It sounds so much better it's easy to distinguish even for non audiophiles. The dac sounds better with the amplification handled by the hpa4 and the measurements back it up.
It sounds so much better it's easy to distinguish even for non audiophiles. The dac sounds better with the amplification handled by the hpa4 and the measurements back it up.
Last edited:
You can't use a dB meter to volume match... You need to measure the actual output voltage of both amps and make sure they are the same (or as close as you can get them). If you do that then I'm sure any "obvious" differences would disappear.
This throws up a huge red flag that something is amiss with the testing procedures. Yes the two amps measure slightly different but the differences should hardly be considered to be audible, specially not "easy to distinguish even for non audiophiles". If they were at all audible they would be subtle in the extreme and take an expert listener to deduce.
Also worth noting is that the measured difference will disappear if the HPA4 is measured while driven by the ADI-2 DAC instead of the APx555 since the DAC is the limiting factor for both amps.
Similar threads
