Topping B100 Amplifier Review

[mlsstl]

Not audibly though. Once you get beyond about 100 damping factor really doesn't matter.



From here

B100 - - Topping audio

TOPPING, born in 2008, has evolved into a beloved global HIFI brand favored by users worldwide. We firmly believe that higher-quality music playback devices are essential for truly showcasing the allure of music. By investing extensively in professional technology and exceptional industrial...

www.toppingaudio.com

Output impedance <5mOhm
8/0.005 = 1600

There you go doing math again! Audiophiles don't approve of math.

 

[Skj]

Amp power these days super ultra highly overrated especially considering the room size we live in. I have b100s and pair it with chord tt2 directly via xlr. I have set b100 in low gain ( unity gain) and tt2 also in low gain, means at -3L volume setting of tt2 I get 6v unclipped output. Since b100 is in unity gain, b100 only provides current, no voltage gain. 6v in 6ohm is only 6w and I rarely need to set tt2 in high gain. But in low gain b100 has very high input sensitivity so if I set tt2 in high gain I can get around 50w cleam output from b100 in 6ohm as tt2 highest unclipped output in high gain is around 17v via xlr. So b100 is like a match made in heaven for high output dacs like benchmark dac3, chord tt2 and toppings own d900

 

[Panelhead]

Or Toppings E50 II.
I was told by Topping that the B100’s are not a good match for average efficiency speakers. Any of the other top measured amplifiers from Topping were better suited.
Why? Heat generation and dissipation. The B100’s use the same chassis as the E70 Velvet DAC. Passive cooling, no external fins. The case works fantastic for a dac, and no headphone amplifier.
John Yang did not design the amplifier for everyday use. It is a design exercise on low noise and distortion. Plus low output level linearity. Think maybe to drive his headphones on occasion.
It is perfect for driving my horns. Use low gain on B100, and high gain from the E70 Velvet (5.2 volts). With most tracks attenuating dac to -15 to - 18dB is very loud at a distance of 10 meters. Never have turned up higher than -10dB. That was for music mastered at a very low level.
I think my B100’s will last a really long time. The woofers are four ohm, mids 16, and tweeter 8. With a zero dB digital input and zero attenuation that is 6.75, 1.7, & 3.4 watts to each driver at wide open.
Normal listening level peaks are at least 20dB below that. More like 30dB.
The B100 is a huge design success. I was told the Topping specs are mostly the residual NOISE FLOOR OF TESTING SYSTEM. The B100’s are below the published Topping specs. Not a marketing success. If marketed as the lowest noise, lowest distortion, most linear amplifier ever for low power applications it would be a marketing success.
There have been a lot of failures.

 

[Skj]

It betters my earlier ahb2 for my kind of listening.

 

[SoySalsaPicante]

It better my earlier ahb2 for my kind of listening.

Aren't they all so extremely transparent as to sound the same?

 

[Dave TR3A]

It is perfect for driving my horns. Use low gain on B100, and high gain from the E70 Velvet (5.2 volts). With most tracks attenuating dac to -15 to - 18dB is very loud at a distance of 10 meters. Never have turned up higher than -10dB. That was for music mastered at a very low level.
I think my B100’s will last a really long time. The woofers are four ohm, mids 16, and tweeter 8. With a zero dB digital input and zero attenuation that is 6.75, 1.7, & 3.4 watts to each driver at wide open.

Are your speakers Klipsch? What you’ve described sounds like my La Scalas.

I’m taking measurements with a Topping Mini300 now. So far they’re pretty impressive.

 

[Panelhead]

Are your speakers Klipsch? What you’ve described sounds like my La Scalas.

I’m taking measurements with a Topping Mini300 now. So far they’re pretty impressive.

La Scala II AL4 with some of the changes Klipsch introduced in the AL5.
Used a B&C DE-120 with walnut tractrix horns from Dave A and later Kappa 15C for woofers. Braced top hats, and replaced the internal lamp cord with Canare speaker cable.
Found the AL4 on closeout right before they released the AL5.
Had to adjust crossover, bump up midrange a couple dB to match the new drivers.
Very resolving.

 

[Panelhead]

I swapped amps recently. Someone mentioned using a MicroMega MyAmp. I had a couple in attic.
Had to hook back up to listen. This an integrated with a distortion spec of 0.003% replacing an amp that has 0.00008%.
The naysayers seem correct. At least a long way from speakers it sounds the same. If I cared I could go upstairs to see if the sound is the same at 10’. But never listen at 10’ anymore.
I guess those who say a coat hanger sounds the same as a Path resistor are correct.
BTW have a PA5 II. Think it is almost the same as a Mini300. IMPRESSIVE BASS. Even turned off sub to see if speaker could run without it. Easily most bass output and quality from the La Scala. Deeper and taut.
This is a speaker that rolls off around 110Hz.

 

[EJ3]

Amp power these days super ultra highly overrated especially considering the room size we live in.

I actually do have a small living room in a small house. But no one else I know has as small a living room (or as small a house).
And I do not have this house because I want this house. I have it because it was conveniently close to my elderly mother's home
(the only reason that I have this home, about 13 miles away) and inexpensive (relatively speaking).
So I would say that "we" who have small listening rooms are in the minority.
At least in the area that I live in.

 

[Skj]

Aren't they all so extremely transparent as to sound the same?

It's a misconception. As sound becomes more and more and transparent, more tiny changes you are able to listen but that doesn't mean these changes make sound worse.

 

[antcollinet]

It's a misconception. As sound becomes more and more and transparent, more tiny changes you are able to listen but that doesn't mean these changes make sound worse.

I think you are misunderstanding the concept of transparency - at least as it is used round here.

A device is transparent - if the signal that comes out of it is audibly exactly the same as the signal that goes into it - no audible changes.

Just as a perfectly transparent piece of glass would be essentially invisible - no distortions, no reflections.

If two devices are transparent - then they must sound the same - because if both of them output an audibly perfect version of the input - then the two outputs must be audibly identical.

 

[Julf]

It's a misconception. As sound becomes more and more and transparent, more tiny changes you are able to listen but that doesn't mean these changes make sound worse.

Either something is transparent, or it isn't.

 

[Panelhead]

Well all this talk got me to hook the B100’s back up. Glorious. Relaxed, smooth, polished sound.
Think at playback at 80dB is where they are in their wheelhouse. The strong point is linearity at very low output.
I switched them to use the trigger on the MicroMega MyAmp. A feature I never used. When paired with an E70 Velvet it was clear why. The trigger on the MyAmp is an output, not input. The E70 has both. Could turn on E70 with MyAmp. Could not turn on MyAmp with E70.
I like using trigger function.

 

[DavidMcRoy]

“ I was told by Topping that the B100’s are not a good match for average efficiency speakers.”

“The B100 is a huge design success.”

There have been a lot of failures.”

It’s a great amplifier…unless you use it.

 

[EJ3]

Either something is transparent, or it isn't.

Some things are more transparent than others. And the more close to true transparency they ae, the more one notices niggling details that the lesser transparent ones where not transparent enough to show. Changing the previously thought to be transparent into not quit transparent because the newer one is more transparent. Transparency in what we can hear (which is highly variable from person to person) is one point, transparency in what we can measure is at a different, more transparent point.
I have been told that I was wrong before (and believed it). But then: I found out that I was mistaken.

 

[antcollinet]

Transparency in what we can hear (which is highly variable from person to person)

But when a device is transparent to your own hearing ability - then more will not improve the sound.

And, there is a degree of transparency that is transparent to everyone all of the time. Getting more transparent than this won't improve the sound for anyone.

 

[MAB]

Some things are more transparent than others. And the more close to true transparency they ae, the more one notices niggling details that the lesser transparent ones where not transparent enough to show. Changing the previously thought to be transparent into not quit transparent because the newer one is more transparent. Transparency in what we can hear (which is highly variable from person to person) is one point, transparency in what we can measure is at a different, more transparent point.
I have been told that I was wrong before (and believed it). But then: I found out that I was mistaken.

This is 100% incorrect way to think about or model effects that have thresholds.

 

[Skj]

I think you are misunderstanding the concept of transparency - at least as it is used round here.

A device is transparent - if the signal that comes out of it is audibly exactly the same as the signal that goes into it - no audible changes.

Just as a perfectly transparent piece of glass would be essentially invisible - no distortions, no reflections.

If two devices are transparent - then they must sound the same - because if both of them output an audibly perfect version of the input - then the two outputs must be audibly identical.

Human brain is much more sensitive than any current measuring equipment. Even dacs having say 120 db and above sound different. I used ahb2 earlier and now b100. For my listening levels b100 is superior even though they both have very high sinad. It's a misconception that after certain sinad all dac or all equipment sound same. More you have a high sinad system ( read more transparent, as it relates to sinad mostly) more audible are the shortcomings of chain like poor shielding of cables, poor power etc etc. So with more transparent system noise mitigation is also needed.

 

[Julf]

Human brain is much more sensitive than any current measuring equipment.

Any evidence to support that claim?

 

[antcollinet]

Human brain is much more sensitive than any current measuring equipment.

Human brain might be I don't know.

Human ears however are not. The measurement instrument used here is at least an order of magnitude better than the best human ears. Two or three orders of magnitude for the vast majority of us. And then you have the problem of masking - which is an effect caused by the construction of the cochlea which means quiet sounds cannot be detected in the presence of louder sounds, and the closer in frequency the two sounds are, the more dramatic the masking - and this is true even for brand new ears.

And if the ear can't detect something - then there is nothing sent to the brain for it to be sensitive to.

What you are percieving (think you are hearing) is the result of perceptive biases, and have nothing to do with the soundwaves reaching your ears. You need to start recognising the power of your biases and do some proper testing to control for them.

Audio Blind Testing - You Are Doing It Wrong! (Video)

Just uploaded a video on the basics of performing controlled tests in audio. It was motivated by saving myself text in having to write all of this down when telling someone who to do these tests right. And as a counter to a few online personalities to keep saying they do "blind" tests yet when...

www.audiosciencereview.com

You could start with an easy to take online test to get an idea of your own personal sensitivity to distortion. You'll be surprised at how insensitive you are compared to the capabilities of even average DACs.

Listening Test

www.klippel.de

More you have a high sinad system ( read more transparent, as it relates to sinad mostly)

No, it doesn't. You'll note SINAD is just one of many measurements carried out here. All have to have good results for transparency, though some are more important than others.