Stereophile Amplification Product of the Year

[DonR]

You need a separate AN phono preamp, I think.

I think there are two different models. One with double CD inputs and one with a CD and phono input. Still, for the money it should have an MC option.

 

[rdenney]

So, what would be the motivation for making this a product of the year? Even among single-ended tube amps (which is a pretty constraining envelope) it's not that great a performer. Who would this serve? The owner of a full-range horn speaker sitting two feet away?

Rick "high distortion but at least its has low power" Denney

 

[DonR]

The photo displayed in the article and above is the non-phono version. The black one above does show a phono input (bottom one).

Seems rather odd they display the non-phono version and then wax lyrical about its phono capabilities and even odder they used an external phono pre-amp to do it.

 

[voodooless]

So, what would be the motivation for making this a product of the year?

$$$

 

[rdenney]

$$$

No, it's got to be more than that. There's some sort of deep self-delusion happening there. (Quoting from memory so probably wrong...) "If there's a better integrated amp out there, I haven't heard it..." Seriously? About the best compliment JA could come with was "marginal". Clearly, the reviewer has trained his ears to prefer high levels of (at least) second-harmonic distortion, and probably also thinks the high background noise is recorded room ambience or something.

If an amp with exactly the same performance was produced by, say, Topping, it would be derided by all at S'phile as the height of incompetence and it would be scorned by all and sundry.

Frankly, it's an insult to the folks at Benchmark who have to share the stage with this.

And then there are the comments from the host of the similarly deluded who pile onto to the guy who simply (and correctly, no matter what one's preferences) commented that the measurements were poor. They say things like those who haven't heard it shouldn't comment, and all that usual bunkum. I'll bet most of those commenters haven't heard it either. And NONE of them have heard it without prior knowledge of what it was and how much it cost.

At least one guy acknowledged that it was an "effects box", and then proceeded to defend effects boxes. Ooookay.

They are making a very small and very elitist club for themselves that absolutely makes regular people roll their eyes and run from the room.

Rick "distortion-trained, apparently" Denney

 

[Skeeter]

I design amplifiers and preamps. I agonise over .003% distortion and mains noise peaks at -115 dBr and here these guys are at 5% distortion and 10 Watts and they ask $15000.

Is price inversely proportional to performance? It does seem so in the ‘high end’.

 

[fpitas]

Ugly looking thing....

I was thinking well constructed DIY, but yeah.

 

[fpitas]

I design amplifiers and preamps. I agonise over .003% distortion and mains noise peaks at -115 dBr and here these guys are at 5% distortion and 10 Watts and they ask $15000.

Is price inversely proportional to performance? It does seem so in the ‘high end’.

Boutique amps are in a world of their own.

 

[fpitas]

The owner of a full-range horn speaker sitting two feet away?

Careful. The guys here that do that will be on you!

 

[fpitas]

I would say, the Bauhaus was the inspiration.

The goth band?

/

 

[Ken1951]

So, I realize that like Jon Snow I know nothing. But the graph looks like this thing has bupkes for power and a shed load of distortion? For 15 Large? No wonder it's the top Amp!

 

[fpitas]

So, I realize that like Jon Snow I know nothing. But the graph looks like this thing has bupkes for power and a shed load of distortion? For 15 Large? No wonder it's the top Amp!

SETs tend to be like that. You get lots of compression and even-order distortion, and you pay extra.

 

[DonR]

So, I realize that like Jon Snow I know nothing. But the graph looks like this thing has bupkes for power and a shed load of distortion? For 15 Large? No wonder it's the top Amp!

Some people will pay big money to be abused. Sweet dreams are made of these, who am I to disagree?

 

[rdenney]

Careful. The guys here that do that will be on you!

That's fine--I'm just wondering what the use case is for a high-dollar amplifier that puts out 900 distortion-free (sort-of) milliwatts. The ambient noise level in my room is 38-40 dBA--the typical low-efficiency box speaker would produce about 75-80 dB peaks three feet from the speaker at 1% distortion. Hey, I get about 40 dB of headroom over ambient noise! That's not silent, of course, but does that really satisfy high-end audiophiles?

My point was that this amp can only be used with super-high-efficiency speakers if the listener is to actually be able to hear the quiet bits.

Rick "listens to non-brickwalled classical music" Denney

 

[fpitas]

That's fine--I'm just wondering what the use case is for a high-dollar amplifier that puts out 900 distortion-free (sort-of) milliwatts. The ambient noise level in my room is 38-40 dBA--the typical low-efficiency box speaker would produce about 75-80 dB peaks three feet from the speaker at 1% distortion. Hey, I get about 40 dB of headroom over ambient noise! That's not silent, of course, but does that really satisfy high-end audiophiles?

My point was that this amp can only be used with super-high-efficiency speakers if the listener is to actually be able to hear the quiet bits.

Rick "listens to non-brickwalled classical music" Denney

There is a cult of super high efficiency speakers, seemingly for its own sake. A lot of questionable claims are made (of course).

 

[HarmonicTHD]

I design amplifiers and preamps. I agonise over .003% distortion and mains noise peaks at -115 dBr and here these guys are at 5% distortion and 10 Watts and they ask $15000.

Is price inversely proportional to performance? It does seem so in the ‘high end’.

Yep.

It preys on the misconception: It is expensive and therefore it must be better (than the cheap stuff). (Just look around how many newcomers we have each week here asking „how can the cheap xyz be better than the expensive abc“).

 

[Blumlein 88]

Well it isn't the most expensive amp they have reviewed. Far from it. So maybe it is a bang for buck choice.

 

[Mart68]

It's inherent FR, high output impedance interacting with the speaker, and high distortion does mean it will have its own unique sound.

I suspect it will but if you read the subjective review (someone has to) Audionote are quite clear that they design for accuracy:

'I asked Qvortrup about the manufacturing philosophy behind Audio Note products.

"We strive for our equipment to have no sound at all but the sound of the recording itself," he continued. "We use an evaluation method we call 'comparison by contrast.' When we audition new equipment, we do not use known recordings. We pick five or ten recordings at random, listen to each of them, and then make a judgment as to whether one or the other piece of equipment individualizes the sound of each recording, and the one that does can then be considered to add/subtract the least from the recording."'

 

[fpitas]

I suspect it will but if you read the subjective review (someone has to) Audionote are quite clear that they design for accuracy:

'I asked Qvortrup about the manufacturing philosophy behind Audio Note products.

"We strive for our equipment to have no sound at all but the sound of the recording itself," he continued. "We use an evaluation method we call 'comparison by contrast.' When we audition new equipment, we do not use known recordings. We pick five or ten recordings at random, listen to each of them, and then make a judgment as to whether one or the other piece of equipment individualizes the sound of each recording, and the one that does can then be considered to add/subtract the least from the recording."'

 

[Ken1951]

I suspect it will but if you read the subjective review (someone has to) Audionote are quite clear that they design for accuracy:

'I asked Qvortrup about the manufacturing philosophy behind Audio Note products.

"We strive for our equipment to have no sound at all but the sound of the recording itself," he continued. "We use an evaluation method we call 'comparison by contrast.' When we audition new equipment, we do not use known recordings. We pick five or ten recordings at random, listen to each of them, and then make a judgment as to whether one or the other piece of equipment individualizes the sound of each recording, and the one that does can then be considered to add/subtract the least from the recording."'

What a load of claptrap.