Mission 778X Integrated Amplifier & DAC Review

[ralph]

Thanks @amirm for another great review.

Tough critics nitpicking all the individual aspects while ignoring the immense amount of functionality.

Fair point and looking at the price it's sold for in Germany it's a fair option for an A/B design with built-in DAC.

You have a point about the transparency, but I think it has a little too little power for that price.

I agree, there are better options if you want an A/B amp, like the NAD c316 BEE but the latter comes w/o DAC.

Now I'm wondering what options are out there for an A/B design with a built-in DAC in the same price range?

 

[ralph]

Unfortunately it didn't measure as good as I had hoped it would...

Don't let the measurements spoil your listening experience. There is nothing really wrong with this amp. And loudspeakers, room acoustics have a much bigger impact on the sound anyway.
And thankyou for sending your amp to Amir!

 

[Håkan]

I see that many in the thread are critical of the amplifier, largely because of the measurements.
But how many of you have actually listened to the amplifier?
As I said, I have the amplifier myself and I had also hoped for better measurements, but to my ears it sounds really good.
As @Rick63 said, it sounded good during the short time he had it before he sent it to @amirm.
If we are to judge an amplifier by the number of watts and how high/low distortion it has, then (almost) all tube amplifiers should sound really bad.
As for the Mission 778x, I am biased because I have it myself and to my 63 year old ears it sounds really good.
Before I bought this amplifier, I had other amplifiers on loan at home, and my old ears couldn't hear any difference between most amplifiers, so I settled on this one, which had enough inputs and a phono stage, and it cost less than many of the others I listened to.

 

[Mnyb]

It’s probably fine , a bit low powered actually. Will work for many customers.

I suggest design sloppiness, that DAC distortion should not be there , they did not do,thier homework. It maybe inaudible with music , much cheaper designs trivialy have better DAC’s . It does not inspire confidence.

The feature set is very good and design is nice .

But It lacks room EQ or PEQ which would have made me prefer a WiiM product for this kind. money . I gave it a not terribly vote btw .
But it does not *suck* it’s just not for me and I can think of more suitable products for most other use cases .

 

[welwynnick]

I don’t believe you could tell the difference with any of them.

The only reason I'm on ASR at all is because Amir's measurements DID correlate with the differences that I heard between the top and bottom half amplifiers.

Whether I could tell the difference between any of the amplifiers within the top half of the chart is another matter. I wouldn't be sure about that.

For the avoidance of doubt, I was doing blind tests before ASR started.

 

[amirm]

I see that many in the thread are critical of the amplifier, largely because of the measurements.
But how many of you have actually listened to the amplifier?

We measure because such listening is not an accurate way to evaluate a product.

Question for folks is whether the measurements match the expectations they had. If it is worse, then it means you partially or completely bought into the marketing story of the product, not its actual performance. By buying products after looking at the measurements, you eliminate this issue. And with it, potentially save money as well.

 

[YouDontHaveEnoughBass]

I'm using this as a do-everything-box for my girlfriends desktop setup, hooked into the PC by USB one end and a pair of Ascilab F6B/S the other end (corrective EQ done on the PC)

At the time of purchase there was little else on the market offering everything in one including most importantly USB input, I'm unsure why this is such a rare inclusion even the Wiim doesn't have it!

I'm thinking of switching to a FiiO KA11 feeding straight into a Fosi V3, that'll save some desk space and by the look of it perform better (though I'm unsure I'd pass a blind AB test between the two tbh)

 

[Pauli]

»Parable« ...

Take your dog to a well-respected vet for a routine check-up. The vet tells you afterwards, that the measurements of your dog gave no reason for any real concern, but that he definitely had seen quite a few dogs of the same breed before that had some better measurements.

On your way home, you’re realizing that you love that dog even more now

 

[ralph]

We measure because such listening is not an accurate way to evaluate a product.

Absolutely, let me rephrase that, putting it into an engineering context: engineers measure. By looking at the measurements they know from research how different measured devices impact music reproduction. That helps to improve them. And of course it helps to give an accurate and objective forecast of how they perform.

 

[Mart68]

I see that many in the thread are critical of the amplifier, largely because of the measurements.
But how many of you have actually listened to the amplifier?
As I said, I have the amplifier myself and I had also hoped for better measurements, but to my ears it sounds really good.

It should have better measured performance in this day and age. But the problems are not serious enough to be audible. So it will sound just fine as you have discovered.

Note this isn't a subjective review, there's no listening test, just the measurements. So comments here are naturally just about the measurements. No-one (I should think) disputes that in use it will amplify without any audible issues.

 

[DanielT]

You're probably aware that this is a characteristic of good Class AB amplifiers... An amplifier worthy of this class should exhibit this kind of performance for this test :

Mission 778X is an ok amp, but already fifty years ago you could design class AB that measured as well, if even a little better from what I can see:

Yamaha A-1 Vintage Amplifier Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Yamaha A-1 vintage integrated amplifier. It is on kind loan from a member. He tells me that it has been serviced and restored a couple of years ago. The Yamaha A-1 came out in 1977 during a competition to produce the best spec audio products...

www.audiosciencereview.com

With phono inputs and pre out. The Yamaha A-1 is cheaper used than the Mission 778X , BUT observe the small caveat in Amir's review of the Yamaha: ....it has been serviced and restored a couple of years ago.
So just buying a used one is not like a new one. After all, it is fifty year old electronics that may have more or less worn out over the decades. That is if the amplifier has been used a lot anyway.

 

[DanielT]

Now I'm wondering what options are out there for an A/B design with a built-in DAC in the same price range?

Since I mentioned Yamaha in the post above:

A new Yamaha A-S 301/A-S 501? Or if they now go under the model name A-S 301 MK II/A-S 501 MK II? Are they sold where you live?
They both have built-in DACs. I don't know how good these DACs are though.

 

[DSJR]

I now want to find out how good or bad the latest Rega Brio 7 is, as it's similar money to the Cyrus, which used to go out via dealer chains rather than the independents. Same amp circuit as before apparently, but re-laid out to accommodate a dac internally and claims the performance of the amp has benefitted by the slight layout refinements.

 

[Mart68]

I now want to find out how good or bad the latest Rega Brio 7 is, as it's similar money to the Cyrus, which used to go out via dealer chains rather than the independents. Same amp circuit as before apparently, but re-laid out to accommodate a dac internally and claims the performance of the amp has benefitted by the slight layout refinements.

The Mission is £550 the Brio 7 is £800 so I'd say a significant price difference there, Dave.

Same output power, what's the audible difference going to be? Almost certainly none at all.

 

[welwynnick]

Mission 778X is an ok amp, but already fifty years ago you could design class AB that measured as well, if even a little better from what I can see:

Yup. There were few ASR-style measurements 50 years ago, but the NAD 2200 is about 40 years old, and that put in a decent showing:

In my worst-case-SINAD league table, the 778X sits next to the Denon X8500H and the Parasound JC1, and I didn't think that was good enough 15 years ago.

 

[DSJR]

The Mission is £550 the Brio 7 is £800 so I'd say a significant price difference there, Dave.

Same output power, what's the audible difference going to be? Almost certainly none at all.

Apologies, so rather cheaper than I thought. Rega dealers will ignore it and of course the Brios are UK made for good or ill, so naturally more costly to produce regardless of design. I'd still suggest that both models are from a bygone era where 'Good Enough' was judged good enough to sell.

There's a CD transport and streamer available to make a 'stack system' for those interested -

https://dougbradyhifi.com/products/mission-778x-with-778cdt-778s-bundle?variant=56253087089026&country=GB&currency=GBP&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=17508743226

 

[ralph]

A new Yamaha A-S 301/A-S 501? Or if they now go under the model name A-S 301 MK II/A-S 501 MK II? Are they sold where you live?

Not sure about the MK II but, but 301 and 501 are sold here. Anyway, I'm not looking for another amp right now, was asking out of curiosity - thanks for your reply!

 

[aagstn]

Since I mentioned Yamaha in the post above:

A new Yamaha A-S 301/A-S 501? Or if they now go under the model name A-S 301 MK II/A-S 501 MK II? Are they sold where you live?
They both have built-in DACs. I don't know how good these DACs are though.

The Yamaha DACs are not going to measure near Topping, but they are going to sound just fine in use. I would doubt any of their noise would be in the audible range for most people. I use an entry level Yamaha Network Receiver and am happy to trade off performance I can't hear at my old age for features and reliability. I had a Wiim and I know I was supposed to love it, but I didn't. Software several years ago wasn't my cup of tea and my left and right channels bled into each other. I'm sure I was just unlucky on that but have none of those issues with the Yamaha. It has all the old nonsense I want like AM/FM and Net Radio.

 

[Gremlins]

I have to say i am a little disapointed by measurements

A friend of mine has this amp driving 92 db speakers from Triangle, ans on listening sessions, we could not fault the amp, neither did we ''heard'' those bad mesurements

At some point, if we can't hear bad things, does it matter it measures not so well?

 

[DSJR]

I have to say i am a little disapointed by measurements

A friend of mine has this amp driving 92 db speakers from Triangle, ans on listening sessions, we could not fault the amp, neither did we ''heard'' those bad mesurements

At some point, if we can't hear bad things, does it matter it measures not so well?

It's good enough by older standards.

I mean, distortion in the 60s and 70s was regarded in HiFi Choice tests to be 'good' back in the dark ages of the 80s and even the famous Quad 405-2 'current dumper' power amp had distortion around -70dB I remember and could still easily reproduce recording venue differences.

We're deeply spoiled here really, nit-picking over some wonderful inexpensive gear that on the bench, could out-perform most equipment from past decades. To answer a criticism by one engineer who doesn't seem to post here now (sadly), I think the current lot of little amps should be reliable enough now, as reliabilty teething troubles seem sorted for most of it.

A pal of mine had a Yamaha AS 701, felt the amp was 'meh' (I suspect the visuals played a part here) and didn't rate the digital input at all. He's now happy with a Wiim I gather although his current speakers have amps built in. Knowing the base platform for the Yamaha goes back three decades or so, I'd not be unhappy with one I have to say!