• 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!

PS Audio M700 Monoblock Amplifier Review

Status
Not open for further replies.

GaryMnz

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Messages
58
Likes
18
Here is an 86db/w speaker eating up 600 watts with dynamic music at not insane volumes. Room size can mean the difference between needing 100 watts and 400 watts to avoid clipping for the same speakers playing the same music at the same volume at the listening position.


That's Alan Shaw of Harbeth and the video is a surprise to me. I started my interest in power demands when sharing with Harbeth at CES shows. I was back then arguing for more power not less. It was with Harbeth at shows that I was measuring with an Oscilloscope and recording numbers. Alan Shaw argued vehemently for modest powers being sufficient. I was looking to justify the 250 watt partnering.

I never saw power such as this video is showing, and of course the one uncertainty here is the amplifier power meter, how do we know what the accuracy of those is or how they calculate actual power. Is it for example a volt/amp measurement? If so then very high power levels could be recorded by an amplifier that was rated at say 200 w into 8Ohms but which had large current reserves.
 

GaryMnz

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Messages
58
Likes
18
Quote from Amir:
Ideally I like to see dynamic range of 96 dB so that we can hear the full range of CD's 16 bit signal without amplifier adding too much noise of its own. Fortunately the noise doesn't scale with power so if you turn up the volume, that issue remedies itself.

Quote from GaryMnz:
Certain dynamic range capabilities are an essential part of an amplifier spec.

Everybody, see the difference.

Hey what are you doing here? You've posted a truncated part of something I said... to what purpose?
 

cistercian

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 20, 2019
Messages
353
Likes
434
Quote from Amir:
Ideally I like to see dynamic range of 96 dB so that we can hear the full range of CD's 16 bit signal without amplifier adding too much noise of its own. Fortunately the noise doesn't scale with power so if you turn up the volume, that issue remedies itself.

Quote from GaryMnz:
Certain dynamic range capabilities are an essential part of an amplifier spec.

Everybody, see the difference.

It is obvious...tediously so.

Best wishes BTW! I hope you and yours are well in China!
 

GaryMnz

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Messages
58
Likes
18
Putting words to other people's mouth, is what you were doing.

Well I took that quote "Ideally I like to see dynamic range of 96 dB so that we can hear the full range of CD's 16 bit signal without amplifier adding too much noise of its own " and questioned it, that's all. He said that that he liked to see amplifiers have a 96dB dynamic range (at least). I questioned that as a required minimum. We rarely listen with 96dB of dynamic range. Where is the fault in my question?
 

JohnYang1997

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
7,175
Likes
18,292
Location
China
Well I took that quote "Ideally I like to see dynamic range of 96 dB so that we can hear the full range of CD's 16 bit signal without amplifier adding too much noise of its own " and questioned it, that's all. He said that that he liked to see amplifiers have a 96dB dynamic range (at least). I questioned that as a required minimum. We rarely listen with 96dB of dynamic range. Where is the fault in my question?
We like to see dynamic range over 140db which I have achieved. So what?

Does it say anything about what's audible and what's essential? Where in the world did he said it's the required minimum? He basically said: Ideally, 96dB is better but it's a none issue. Do you not understand English now?
 

SplitTime

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 31, 2018
Messages
64
Likes
82
@GaryMnz
If you want to have a positive influence on people here - and actually contribute to people learning a few things - I think it would help if you adjusted your tone (pun intended) to be more collaborative and less confrontational. It seems a reasonable request that you post your data and measurements to demonstrate your point - and let that data serve as an explicit example for the ensuing discussion (in a separate thread).
 

GaryMnz

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Messages
58
Likes
18
We like to see dynamic range over 140db which I have achieved. So what?

Does it say anything about what's audible and what's essential? Where in the world did he said it's the required minimum? He basically said: Ideally, 96dB is better but it's a none issue. Do you not understand English now?

140dB. In a domestic environment makes no sense. I do think that there is a language issue. There seems to be difficulty in conveying some of the more subtle implications.
 

GaryMnz

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Messages
58
Likes
18
@GaryMnz
If you want to have a positive influence on people here - and actually contribute to people learning a few things - I think it would help if you adjusted your tone (pun intended) to be more collaborative and less confrontational. It seems a reasonable request that you post your data and measurements to demonstrate your point - and let that data serve as an explicit example for the ensuing discussion (in a separate thread).

A reasonable point made. In truth I had no idea of the push back there would be to a fairly simple initial point. I had assumed that this forum was one that eagerly sought the "truth" and strove to banish the subjective. I assumed it would be fairly willing to put assumptions to a measured test.
 

CDMC

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
1,172
Likes
2,321
Actually, we did get >96dB. The first CD player released (Sony CDP-101) used a 16 bit D/A converter. The Philips based machines used the TDA-1540D (14bit) oversampled at 4x to give comparable numbers to the 16bit converters.

Here's a nice little table showing (actual test results) of several of the very first machines. Note, the Akai CD-D1 used the Philips chipset with twin TDA-1540D (14bit) @4x OS and achieved a dynamic range of 95.9dB...
View attachment 77248

I’ll be. I just remember the silence was strange and uncomfortable. You had no reference to set the volume like with vinyl or tape.
 

CDMC

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
1,172
Likes
2,321
You know John, I bought a Sony CD player and figured I was set. I was wrong...very wrong. I bought a cheap one and after recently upgrading
to a Tascam CD200BT (horrible analog out) driving a RME ADI-2 FS I discovered how much of a fail my old Sony was.

Many probably suffered the same fate as I. I know players were made with good DAC's and good analog paths.

Mine was not. 100 dollars in 1990. CDP-291. Poor...I used it for 30 years John. 30 YEARS.
And now my hearing has declined. I am not happy John, not a bit. I never knew what I was missing...

Consider the possibility that something was failing in your CD player. So you had 29 great years with it and just didn’t notice the decline as it slowly happened over the last year.
 

cistercian

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 20, 2019
Messages
353
Likes
434
We like to see dynamic range over 140db which I have achieved. So what?

Does it say anything about what's audible and what's essential? Where in the world did he said it's the required minimum? He basically said: Ideally, 96dB is better but it's a none issue. Do you not understand English now?

140db is commendable to say the least. Actually...it is EPIC! Great work and thank you for advancing the state of the art.
 

JohnYang1997

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
7,175
Likes
18,292
Location
China
140dB. In a domestic environment makes no sense. I do think that there is a language issue. There seems to be difficulty in conveying some of the more subtle implications.
Whether it makes sense in real world or not does not matter. Objective, technical superiority does not always translate to what we hear. But better is better and shows the engineering skill of companies. In the quote, he explicitly said "Ideally", "like", "that issue remedies itself". It was you adding implications that were not there. We should all be aware that Amir has recommended many cheap amps with good amount of power that don't necessarily perform very well in distortion. It's the price with the mediocre performance that makes this amp impossible to recommend. It's a nice powerful amplifier if price is not part of the equation. But one has to justify the high price using high performance + good user experience.
 

CDMC

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
1,172
Likes
2,321
A reasonable point made. In truth I had no idea of the push back there would be to a fairly simple initial point. I had assumed that this forum was one that eagerly sought the "truth" and strove to banish the subjective. I assumed it would be fairly willing to put assumptions to a measured test.

It is. It is also your hypothesis. Go develop it, run the test, provide the data and methodology, and everyone will comment and point out what factors may or may not be right. It is called peer review.

This is far different than what you have done, which is make a hypothesis and then tell someone to test it for you. Amir (nor is anyone here) is not your lapdog.

As far as your hypothetical discussion between counsel and the bench, I will provide you the correct response from the bench: Sustained, but for relevancy. MOVE ALONG COUNSEL.
 

cistercian

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 20, 2019
Messages
353
Likes
434
Consider the possibility that something was failing in your CD player. So you had 29 great years with it and just didn’t notice the decline as it slowly happened over the last year.
The DAC in it was a cheap 16 bit device made for low cost. I am sure the frequency response changed over the years due to component aging
but the resolution of the RME is worlds better...I am hearing details I never heard before in CD's I have owned for 30 years.
The difference is incredible. On the upside acquiring the RME is completely justified! And that's aside from the EQ and bass/treble/loudness
controls.

ETA Considering inflation the RME and the Tascam cost a good bit less than the high performance Sony John posted.
Not to mention the capabilities of the RME. Sweet!
 
Last edited:

GaryMnz

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Messages
58
Likes
18
It is. It is also your hypothesis. Go develop it, run the test, provide the data and methodology, and everyone will comment and point out what factors may or may not be right. It is called peer review.

No no... It is our host's hypothesis, that a minimum of 96dB is required as we need to at least be able to reproduce the dynamic range capability of a CD. I asked that he justify that claim.
 

GaryMnz

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Messages
58
Likes
18
No no... It is our host's hypothesis, that a minimum of 96dB is required as we need to at least be able to reproduce the dynamic range capability of a CD. I asked that he justify that claim.

And there are other questions that could be raised against the 96dB minimum suggestion... For example, how many loudspeakers can maintain their response over a 96dB range of input signal.
 

CDMC

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
1,172
Likes
2,321
The DAC in it was a cheap 16 bit device made for low cost. I am sure the frequency response changed over the years due to component aging
but the resolution of the RME is worlds better...I am hearing details I never heard before in CD's I have owned for 30 years.
The difference is incredible. On the upside acquiring the RME is completely justified! And that's aside from the EQ and bass/treble/loudness
controls.

ETA Considering inflation the RME and the Tascam cost a good bit less than the high performance Sony John posted.
Not to mention the capabilities of the RME. Sweet!

As a fellow recent purchaser of the RME, I share your enthusiasm. I was able to sell my Schiit Freya S and Gungnir Multibit for more than the RME cost.
 

cistercian

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 20, 2019
Messages
353
Likes
434
As a fellow recent purchaser of the RME, I share your enthusiasm. I was able to sell my Schiit Freya S and Gungnir Multibit for more than the RME cost.
I credit Amir and this site for the purchase. I mean it sincerely when I say it is the best audio gear purchase I have ever made.
I could not be more happy with a piece of gear. RME is epic as a company and their product delivers.
Even the manual is epic.

Without this site...I would never have known.
 

Racheski

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 20, 2020
Messages
1,116
Likes
1,699
Location
Chicago
Well, this segue has been tiresome. Lets return to considering the amplifier that was tested.
Why would a manufacturer intentionally color the sound?
My best guess is that Paul knows his customer base very well. They like the "PS Sound" that his products produce, and/or they cannot tell the sonic difference among audio gear and are heavily influenced by marketing and brand image. For them measurements play no role when they purchase audio gear.
If he believes that PS Audio can sustain an acceptable profit by catering to this customer base, there is no financial incentive to change the way PS Audio develops products. From the perspective of a CEO paying attention to his bottom line, it makes sense to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom