Mark Levinson or Accuphase

[radix]

Accuphase E-4000 has none

Did you see this document?

https://www.accuphase.com/cat/e-4000_e.pdf

 

[JRR]

And just for clarification: the other amp under consideration is the AP E5000 which is equally powerful. I frequently visit Japan so the Accuphase is actually the cheaper option even with the optional DAC and RIAA module.

Specs and details:

https://www.accuphase.com/cat/e-5000_e.pdf

 

[GXAlan]

A

Did you see this document?

https://www.accuphase.com/cat/e-4000_e.pdf

View attachment 342696

They tend to be conservative with their ratings.

The E-5000 has 0.63 microvolt residual noise and this performance which is better than the E-4000.

The E-480 had 4.7 microvolt residual noise and these specs

The E-270 which was measured here had these specs

Looking at this, the E4000 should measure pretty well.

 

[amirm]

Did you see this document?

https://www.accuphase.com/cat/e-4000_e.pdf

View attachment 342696

No. I downloaded a PPT that was named hardware specs or some such thing but had no specs like this.

Ultimately though, we need to test these ourselves to know as test conditions are rarely the same between products.

 

[JRR]

No. I downloaded a PPT that was named hardware specs or some such thing but had no specs like this.

Ultimately though, we need to test these ourselves to know as test conditions are rarely the same between products.

Accuphase post their specs in the online Brocure. Somewhat misleading is the document labeled “Technical information” below the general Brocure. It holds no specs.

In your opinion and measurements aside, which device would you consider more “heirloom” quality? Inside out. My feeling as a layman is Accuphase.

Thanks for taking time to respond.

 

[GXAlan]

Accuphase post their specs in the online Brocure. Somewhat misleading is the document labeled “Technical information” below the general Brocure. It holds no specs.

In your opinion and measurements aside, which device would you consider more “heirloom” quality? Inside out. My feeling as a layman is Accuphase.

Thanks for taking time to respond.

Do you live in the US? Sending the unit into Amir is good way to verify that your product is running up to speed and provides an added data point for the community. Both Levinson and Accuphase should offer a refund if it fails to meet their advertised spec.

Accuphase is heirloom by virtue of their “we hold parts in reserve” philosophy and they continue to service and restore 50 year old products. Not even McIntosh can service their oldest parts anymore.

The problem/strength is that this isn’t free. It’s baked into the sale price.

The E4000 was measured here:

Stereo: Produkt

www.stereo.de

The ML 585.5 was measured here:

Stereo: Produkt

www.stereo.de

While you cannot compare those numbers to other sites/magazines, you can compare them directly.

The E-800 is supposed to be similar to the E5000 in noise performance

Stereo: Produkt

www.stereo.de

 

[GXAlan]

One little bit about "heirloom" quality is this:

アキュフェーズ、能登半島地震で被災した同社製品の無償修理を発表 - PHILE WEB

アキュフェーズ、能登半島地震で被災した同社製品の無償修理を発表

www.phileweb.com

Basically, if you are the registered owner of an Accuphase product that was damaged in the recent 7.6 magnitude earthquake in Japan, repairs are free. They did the same for the big earthquakes in Japan in 2011 and 2018. They have the fine print that they cannot fix every bit of cosmetic damage - they will fix the audio performance part and they have the fine print that if there is an issue with the safety of the product that cannot be repaired, they will have to abandon that.

Still, it's pretty cool to see Accuphase do that! Again, it's not magic. You are pre-paying for this service in the price -- but in contrast to audiophile snake oil, at least Accuphase *service* is among the very best. One thing that does separate them from companies like Bryston is that, as far as I know, Accuphase only provides this level of service to the original owner if the unit is also purchased through authorized dealers. Bryston is known for transferrable 20 year warranties.

 

[dualazmak]

Accuphase only provides this level of service to the original owner if the unit is also purchased through authorized dealers.

No, furthermore...
Just for your info, for the users with in Japan, Accuphase provides "Second User Registration" for those who get Accuphase gear(s) in used market.
https://www.accuphase.co.jp/second_user_about.php

 

[amirm]

In your opinion and measurements aside, which device would you consider more “heirloom” quality? Inside out. My feeling as a layman is Accuphase.

Thanks for taking time to respond.

Accuphase. 20 years ago ML would be the answer but not anymore.

 

[dogmamann]

In this price tier I really would just go for whichever one you think looks better and has a better warranty. You are well beyond paying for performance or sound quality, at this level it's about paying for a statement piece that you can get fixed if something goes wrong.

E: to be clear there's nothing wrong with that, but if you want to go for sheer price-performance you can probably chop a zero off the price tag and still get truly excellent sound.

So it means there shouldn’t be any sort of audible differences between the two, right?

 

[dualazmak]

All the Accuphase registered users (including myself, of course!) receive "New Year's Greeting Card" every year (at least in Japan).

 

[kemmler3D]

So it means there shouldn’t be any sort of audible differences between the two, right?

I haven't seen the numbers for these, but at this price tier you have every right to expect basically perfect performance - so both will sound great with no audible faults to distinguish them.

 

[JeffS7444]

I've previously owned products from the original ML Audio Systems and McIntosh, and currently own Marantz, albeit nowhere near as fancy as @GXAlan's. But I don't think I've ever seen Accuphase in the USA, so it scores novelty points from me. Once upon a time, I might have though it's styling was too old-school for my tastes, but besides being more mature (okay, old) in 2024, I feel that the "tech" look has become ubiquitous, while tactile controls and big moving coil galvanometers have become a scarce luxury. Once upon a time, my audiophile self might have groused about Accuphase's use of RCA jacks mounted in plastic blocks, rather than individually chassis-mounted parts. But I've since come to appreciate that the former are actually among the most fuss-free types, particularly if paired with light and springy RCA plugs.

Early Mark Levinson products like the ML2 monoblock amplifiers were among my first exposures to the use of thick aluminum billet in hifi products, and I suppose that aspect of it's design was so influential that the aesthetic has become commonplace, and no longer seems super luxurious as it once did.

Not a particular fan of hefty metal remotes, as these tend to get dropped or tossed in a drawer with other remotes. But the shape and layout of the ML's looks like it'd be comfier. But for me, remote is of secondary importance.

 

[Purité Audio]

Accuphase. 20 years ago ML would be the answer but not anymore.

Amir, do the ‘behemoth’ amplifiers, the ‘milled from solid aluminium’ etc is there any particular scenario where they would have a sonic advantage over a contemporary Purifi/Hypex design?
Best
Keith

 

[DHT 845]

I currently have a ML 585 on trial. It sounds good. One thing that concerns me is that they seemingly took two modules out of a 5 channel home theater amp (ML535h) put a preamp in the box and slapped a higher price tag on it. For instance, it lacks the beer can sized capacitors you’d see in an Accuphase. What do you think, price notwithstanding, is the better constructed AMP?

I share your concerns about the design of the ML585. I don't like several small filter capacitors in the power supply instead of one large one (subjective, but something about it is more nervous and shallow). But unfortunately my experience with Accuphase is not good but for other reasons, accuphase has a slight tendency to sound artificial, electronic for me. So when it comes to solid state, I would look elsewhere. It's a pity that such amplifiers are not tested on this forum and Chinese desk toys predominate.

 

[Deleted member 21114]

I don't like several small filter capacitors in the power supply instead of one large one (subjective, but something about it is more nervous and shallow).

I'd rather averaged tolerances, lower ESR / impedance, smaller effect of a single failure, greater surface area for heat dissipation, more optimal PCB layout, reduced price etc. over girth.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Not a particular fan of hefty metal remotes, as these tend to get dropped or tossed in a drawer with other remotes. But the shape and layout of the ML's looks like it'd be comfier. But for me, remote is of secondary importance.

It is a funny thing, the remote is most people's interface to the product so for me its ergonomics are one of if not the most crucial aspects in my buying decision!

I detest up/down volume buttons and have to tolerate them on almost everything we own but have stuck with my main Devialet amp for over 10 years now because the remote has a rotary volume control...
It is quiet, adequately powerful for my use has all the connections I need and draws no attention to itself but its crowning glory is the remote and apart from an old Quad preamp no other remote comes close

We are all different.

 

[radix]

In your opinion and measurements aside, which device would you consider more “heirloom” quality? Inside out. My feeling as a layman is Accuphase.

I would not consider anything I can buy at a big box store to be heirloom quality (i.e. ML). I understand that's a bit of a nonsequiter (where something is sold does not dictate it's quality), but I think heirloom implies it's something special. Accuphase, IMO, has maintained it's luxury brand by not pumping out product to large retail chains. I'd also say heirloom is different than quality. McIntosh has diluted it's luxury brand by selling entry-level gear everywhere, but maybe that is working out for them as upgradeitus is common. And they do maintain the bulk of their product line to in-store sales. I'm not in the audio business, so this is my perception from outside.

In the US, you can find Accuphase dealers from their US distributor: https://axissaudio.com/find-a-dealer/

I agree with some of the above posts that when you get to this level, it becomes primarily about appearance, usability, and features and the sound quality must just be a given (though one should verify!). It must look good to you (which is highly subjective and you need to pick it) and it must have a user interface you like to use. I've switched away from some otherwise very good products because I do not like their user interface or how they integrate with other products.

P.S. I've never owned Accuphase, but have long considered it.

 

[nanook]

About 20 years ago I had the opportunity to disassemble a few Accuphase amps a friend of mine had in his high-end shop, integrated ones and a hefty stereo main amp.
My intention was to build a "copy" for my setup - this price range was not at all affordable for me. I never followed up on this and never actually build one though.

I have extracted the schematics and by doing this I have realized:
- really nice discrete circuit design (I love to see good engineering)
- perfect layout of the PCBs (quite obviously paying perfect attention to the return currents. I.e. keeping the loops small and thus reducing inductance and - even more important - magnetic fields that can couple into other wires or PCB traces and will cause distortion (speaker and PS wiring) or hum (PS wiring in front of the reservoir caps)
- no "finger thick" copper bars for the power supply and speaker wiring. Instead they did use industry standard connectors and the wiring was as well just perfect regarding return currents (see above). They even added snubber networks in the power supply section
- last-not-least a proper mechanical construction with exchangeable modules such that servicing the amps is straightforward.

I'm convinced, the same holds true for ML and some other companies. Unfortunately I did not have the opportunity to have a closer look at those. The integrated amp ML 383 from ML would have been one of my favourite objects back then.

On the downside I have seen a lot of bad engineering in various amps that I fixed back then - usually some fancy hyped products from more or less unknown companies. If you sell a significant volume, the product has to be reasonably mature, otherwise it can ruin the company.
This is likely the reason why I fixed these units for my friend - service was not available anymore.

 

[SCR]

As an electronics engineer i just love Accuphase for their clean and well done design considerations, it feels like the designers really care about their work . Then again i am german, and germans tend to have a similar interest in details and perfection as the japanese have.
BTW, Mark left his company in the mid nineties and used to be at LG about ten years ago.