• 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!

Topping B100 Amplifier Review

Rate this amplifier:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 28 6.7%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 24 5.8%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 79 19.0%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 284 68.4%

  • Total voters
    415
Without knowing the (protection) circuit/algorithm, adequate SOA protection will probably not be guaranteed.
With low speaker EPDR values, however, the load on the output transistors can exceed the permissible SOA limits even with moderate (real) average power. The amplifier may die before it even gets really warm.
It seems just not a robust design, disadvantaged in this way by being bridged Class AB or B.
 
Ro... Bust.

(where Ro = Volume)


Or De Funkd.
Bum deal, either way.
My 2c.
 
Last edited:
Not fully convinced many failures are not "user error" but glad I didn't pull the trigger on getting a set of these for my tweeters - which would probably be fine since they are 8ohm and power requirements are smaller. Still feeling the pain of the PA5 v1 that toasted itself pulling the same duty though.
 
Aye, but surely there is protection circuitry for this?
Clearly it doesn't work.

Edit: Perhaps I am wrong here, but surely a competent amp should not just expire when exposed to a difficult speaker load?
 
Last edited:
The protection circuit is possibly implemented in the firmware. The MCU has 108 MHz, which is high enough. Which would mean that it could be adapted by a software update.
 
Fair enough. But it should not really be necessary. And I doubt those with broken amps and difficult returns will find that comforting.

High SINAD. Low reliability.
Bad product imho.
Again, my 2c.
 
a competent amp should not just expire when exposed to a difficult speaker load
Topping would actually only have to extend its note, perhaps to 'at least 4 ohms: purely ohmic or an equivalent EPDR value'. I assume that the amp performs well with a purely ohmic load of 4 ohms and was designed accordingly.
Does anyone from topping actually read along here and could confirm one or the other or not?
 
Last edited:
The protection circuit is possibly implemented in the firmware. The MCU has 108 MHz, which is high enough. Which would mean that it could be adapted by a software update.
I think we have several factors here at work
- the sensing circuits
- the algorithms used for modelling the device state
- the robustness at the choosen limits when they are violated constantly
- the general design and execution quality, and production quality control

There might be issues with all of the above. Topping seem to have a very aggressive policy, trying to make profit by cutting as much cornes as they can, everywhere and all the time, except concentrating to land in the top 10 of the SINAD charts.
 
If the protection circuit follows the action of this bimetal switch or if it cuts the circuit of its own I would look at this first.
They are notoriously inaccurate but cheap I guess.

(I hope they didn't implemented this after my suggestion at the fosi mono thread,this was a desperate measure I proposed to some users to control fans,not to track critical temps)
 
Meant IC integrated circuit (chip) ...if it was fully discreet class B amp (not chips not firmware not USB c ...just linear PSU, capacitors, transistors, resistors, inductors... It would MUCH more durable, it would perhaps last forever...but perhaps internal programmed obsolescence is involved. My TVC all discreet line stage line preamp no only inside transformers wounds and point to point aerial internal wiring and some switch made in Switzerland, that preamp is 8 years old daily use and it will last forever, on other size , my friend Julio loved her Topping line preamp... Till like our b100 it blew up too. it was many technician even traveled to china, no fix. Topping is great, best actually, for DAC. But preamps and DACs has no reliability at all. I was considering B200... It is actually**** discreet?? Idk. Meanwhile I'm happy with my 3E Audio TPA3255 PFFB module amp board based DIY power amp also reviewed by Armir, not best measurement in world but as good as NAD Purify comercial power amp. I wish there is a Nilai or AHB2 cheaper but there is not. Meanwhile Im happy with 3E Audio PFFB amp diy
Best to minimize anecdote and speculation on what is wrong. We don't know why these particular amps failed, we do know that discrete amplifiers are not intrinsically more reliable than chip-based amps.

In fact, modern chip amps have advanced reliability and safety features built in (temperature and voltage protection, short-circuit protection, soft-start and -stop, clipping, etc.) Discrete require all of this to be designed, built, and tested by the product development team. Also, IC manufacturers offer this in a package that is rel-tested. So long as the product doesn't do anything odd in implementation, or mess up during manufacturing and testing, the IC isn't intrinsically disadvantage to fail. The presence or absence of luxury components, like switches from certain regions, or inductors wound by certain individuals;), doesn't fundamentally change the product's reliability.

Serviceability is sometimes better for discrete circuit implementations.
 
Have to say that the fact that it seems several have failed so soon does not reflect particularly well. Again.
Surely this is the sort of thing that should have become apparent in pre-release testing?
 
Have to say that the fact that it seems several have failed so soon does not reflect particularly well. Again.
Surely this is the sort of thing that should have become apparent in pre-release testing?
I was one of the first people to get these and I put a good several hours of play into my system daily (background music while I work), so perhaps it takes a lot of thermal cycles before things go awry.

-Ed
 
Best to minimize anecdote and speculation on what is wrong. We don't know why these particular amps failed, we do know that discrete amplifiers are not intrinsically more reliable than chip-based amps.

In fact, modern chip amps have advanced reliability and safety features built in (temperature and voltage protection, short-circuit protection, soft-start and -stop, clipping, etc.) Discrete require all of this to be designed, built, and tested by the product development team. Also, IC manufacturers offer this in a package that is rel-tested. So long as the product doesn't do anything odd in implementation, or mess up during manufacturing and testing, the IC isn't intrinsically disadvantage to fail. The presence or absence of luxury components, like switches from certain regions, or inductors wound by certain individuals;), doesn't fundamentally change the product's reliability.

Serviceability is sometimes better for discrete circuit implementations.
Oh! So an all discreet output Hypex/Purifi/Benchmark amp is not more robust and reliable regarding low impedances or even power surges than a chip-amp like Tripath or Texas Instrumments based projects? :) fascinating
Said that, contradictorily, im super happy with my, reviewed here,
3e Audio PFFB stereo amplifier module for DIY , with a toroidal power supply, box, connectorr wiring and power switch, it sounds really clean detailed and nice -as measured by Amirm, and that a chip amp based tpa34255 by Texas Instruments... Wish to known the budget for do it with a Hypex Nilai module and mainly the knowledge to set it with a full multivoltages linear power supply (i know they "measures worse" but i like it) but i don't, meanwhile im super happy with my 3e Audio DIY module based amp and my high impedance floorstanders
 
Last edited:
Could these mono blocks power larger towers like CSS Audio 2TD-X's or Neil Blanchard MLTL-6's? I am not understanding the safety mode/shut down thing? Does it reset? How often does it happen?
 
This depends on the usage. Typically it seems to be one of the following:
1) too much peak power into a low impedance
2) overheating due to inadequate cooling
 
Surely this is the sort of thing that should have become apparent in pre-release testing?

You would think so wouldn't you? I'd say the designers probably thoroughly tested the amplifiers on typical small bookshelf speakers and all was well. So they pushed this thing out the door and let the real world beta testing be done by their paying customers.

Then you get reviewers merely testing amplifiers on an analyzer and dummy loads and not actually listening at medium-high levels for an extended period on a pair of large multi-way loudspeakers. Loudspeakers with potentially challenging impedance curves, and subsequently, they don't experience these failure/shutdown events either.

They might be Topping the silly SINAD chart, but they are Bottoming the reliability chart in my books.
 
Back
Top Bottom