Topping B100 Amplifier Review

[khaliss]

@Jimster480 , can you advise me on my setup and what should I go for? Another approach I have in mind is to keep then B100 and maybe xover the electrostatic speakers to 80hz (instead of 40), that way it doesn't have to drive hard (given that it only has 100watts @4ohms) while retaining the B100's superb resolution of midrange & upper frequencies & ultra-clean amplification... and leave it to my subs to output low bass audio?

 

[Julf]

I don't have logs, since I didn't do the testing to make a thread on this forum. I did it out of my own interest along with my group of friends who are all into Hi-Fi.

Ok, so if you didn't write down your guesses, it wasn't a proper test.

The funniest thing about this thread; is that we went from talking about science and audible transparency; to arguing about whether or not you can hear the difference on devices with hugely audible distortion and lack of resolution of any kind. It seems that people on this forum love to argue about everything, which wonders to me why you would be into Hi-Fi at all... just buy a $15 pair of speakers because everything sounds the same... the $15 speakers have 50 SINAD and that wouldn't have audible distortion either.
So without a double blind ABX study with scientific logs; nobody can tell me that $5 speakers from Walmart sound different than $2500 speakers or $25000 speakers...

The insanity of some people on this forum really surprises me sometimes.

So why are you here?

I like high resolution sound.

What does "high resolution sound" mean? How do you define it?

 

[Jimster480]

@Jimster480 , can you advise me on my setup and what should I go for? Another approach I have in mind is to keep then B100 and maybe xover the electrostatic speakers to 60hz (instead of 40), that way it doesn't have to drive hard (given that it only has 100watts @4ohms) while retaining the B100's superb resolution of midrange & upper frequencies & ultra-clean amplification... and leave it to my subs to output low bass audio?

I would try the B100 and see how you like it and then use a filter to remove the lower frequency like you mentioned. If you think it sounds good in that configuration, then keep it like that. I would try it even without 40 Hertz pass filter and just see if it really matters.
Typically, normal speakers don't have that great of response at only 40 Hertz, but I'm not sure about your specific pair.

Ok, so if you didn't write down your guesses, it wasn't a proper test.

So why are you here?

What does "high resolution sound" mean? How do you define it?

Sure, I wrote down notes years ago when we were doing the tests, but considering that it's blind, I wasn't writing as I was doing it, so my friend just recorded it on a post-it note. I since moved no idea where the post-it notes are, never kept track of them, because why would I? I had a stack of them from me and my friends...

To me, high resolution sound is when it sounds like I am actually there with the musicians who are playing live in front of me. As I have had the lucky opportunity to see many musicians play live in classical and jazz scenarios, I know that both of these are quite difficult to capture the real feeling you get when the musicians are playing in front of you.
You really need high quality recordings and high quality reproduction to capture the soul of the instruments used in classical and jazz.

Even in the world of electronic music with artists like Armin Van Buuren and his other associated acts in Armada music, they record things at very high quality levels, mostly using FLAC.
There are many aspects of some of this electronic music which gets obviously flattened or voices (lots of female singers) lacking depth. Again sounding somewhat different from live (but it depends on the setting since it's electronic and not organic instruments).
Electronic has the most variation, but I feel like next to classical and jazz, the most ability to bring out the true quality audio system as long as you're listening to the right artists.

 

[DualTriode]

That's with a 20kHz measurement bandwidth. The harmonics are falling off the measurement. Amir is only measuring one harmonic of 20kHz and it's already shooting up. Don't let Topping's AP plots deceive you.

No deception, There are no HD's out there at 250k BW.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

@khaliss

Before letting yourself be swayed by what comes across as an elitist viewpoint with little substantiated rationale, I’d highly recommend taking the tests linked here and sharing your results. The results will speak for itself.
Happy testing!

Listening Test

www.klippel.de

 

[Jimster480]

@khaliss

Before letting yourself be swayed by what comes across as an elitist viewpoint with little substantiated rationale, I’d highly recommend taking the tests linked here and sharing your results. The results will speak for itself.
Happy testing!

Listening Test

www.klippel.de

This test is complete trash and this is a fundamental problem with the audio scene and shows the lack of understanding of people even who call themselves "audiophiles" or "audio enthusiasts".
The test tone is an extremely simple one that has very little dynamic range and no actual complex sounds whatsoever.
Additionally it has no "offensive tones", these videos are the types of trash that audio snake oil salesmen (or people working at companies like Marantz) will watch when they make a trash product that performs with ~60 SINAD and say "wow this is totally fine" when in reality is not.

However even in this trash test; I could hear the difference starting from

and this is using my Denon Ah-MM400's which aren't particularly accurate and they are being driven by my FiiO KA13 here on my laptop...

I did the test with my eyes closed and just hit the space bar when I could hear a difference in the tones. First time I did it; it was 0.19% but my volume was quite low... turned the volume up and did it again and it was 0.09% so then I played some more and realized what I heard that was different and I listened for that part which becomes distorted... with the volume a bit higher again... 0.041% is when I heard the difference. Played a bit further; confirmed I definitely hear it here.... tried again and it is still the same.
Will test again later with better headphones in a more quiet area.

I can confirm though that the distortion is not easy to hear in this trash test track.

Distortion is easier to hear in this track:

Where the low background frequency sweep that starts around 2:00 in the song becomes lost or unable to be understood what sound it is.

Or in this track where microdetails are lost:

Where the sounds of the glasses moving in the background and the waitress voice

Here is another song where distortion is easier to hear:

The sound of the balls hitting the floor (not really the marbles, but the basketball / dodgeball) becomes distorted on the impact sound. The distortion will become more obvious once the whole song gets going as there are lots of different marbles and balls dropped at the same time...

 

[Old_School_Brad]

This test is complete trash and this is a fundamental problem with the audio scene and shows the lack of understanding of people even who call themselves "audiophiles" or "audio enthusiasts".
The test tone is an extremely simple one that has very little dynamic range and no actual complex sounds whatsoever.
Additionally it has no "offensive tones", these videos are the types of trash that audio snake oil salesmen (or people working at companies like Marantz) will watch when they make a trash product that performs with ~60 SINAD and say "wow this is totally fine" when in reality is not.

Distortion is much easier to detect with simple sine waves, like the ones shown in the video. Sine waves are pure tones at a single frequency, so any deviation from the expected signal stands out clearly. In contrast, complex tones, such as those found in music, involve a combination of frequencies and harmonics that can mask distortion, making it more challenging for the listener to identify. This is why sine waves are commonly used in audio testing -they reveal distortion in its most transparent form, while complex signals can hide it due to how the human ear processes multiple frequencies at once.

This becomes evident when comparing the results of the Klippel test (using music) to the results from listening to test tones, like those in the video.
The threshold for detecting distortion with music will be significantly different compared to that with a sine wave.

 

[Jimster480]

Distortion is much easier to detect with simple sine waves, like the ones shown in the video. Sine waves are pure tones at a single frequency, so any deviation from the expected signal stands out clearly. In contrast, complex tones, such as those found in music, involve a combination of frequencies and harmonics that can mask distortion, making it more challenging for the listener to identify. This is why sine waves are commonly used in audio testing -they reveal distortion in its most transparent form, while complex signals can hide it due to how the human ear processes multiple frequencies at once.

This becomes evident when comparing the results of the Klippel test (using music) to the results from listening to test tones, like those in the video.
The threshold for detecting distortion with music will be significantly different compared to that with a sine wave.

Sine waves might be easier but they are at static frequencies. Just like why the linearity test was created on this website; as you increase frequency and tone numbers; distortion multiplies and becomes more easily heard. This is where microdetails are lost or background sounds are distorted, or high frequency tones that might come along with other tones (like a violin in an orchestra piece, playing a higher note) would become distorted. Especially as it is playing while other instruments are playing at other frequencies.

Also I edited my above post and changed the edit after you made your post. So if you go back and look at my previous post (refresh required) you will see where I added some other songs where the distortion is easier to identify. As well as where I heard the first distortion.

 

[khaliss]

I did the test anyway, and I can only listen at -20db (80db?) on my Marantz AVR cuz wife is in the next room, didn't wanna annoy her too much lol... end result was -33 (is that okay?) I picked Tracy Chapman cuz I know the track well

 

[Old_School_Brad]

@Jimster480 ,

I'm not sure why you continue to push your point. This isn't about you -it's about @khaliss

We all have different thresholds. While you clearly have a more sensitive perception, you're also not representing the average enthusiast. I thought we established this on the previous page, yet you seem to persist with the assumption that everyone hears exactly as you do.

Please, give others the space to discover their own thresholds. Step aside and let that process unfold.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

I did the test anyway, and I can only listen at -20db (80db?) on my Marantz AVR cuz wife is in the next room, didn't wanna annoy her too much lol... end result was -33 (is that okay?) I picked Tracy Chapman cuz I know the track well

-33 dB is quite alright. I’m sure the graph at the end indicated that it’s better than average, right?

What it means, is that you need the distortion to be -33 dB below the music signal levels to hear it, which translates to roughly 2% distortion. Meanwhile, your Marantz specifications are at 0.08%.

 

[khaliss]

I changed my front L/R crossover to 80Hz, making my subs work more & less the Marantz amp driving my ML electrostatics... definitely discernable improvement when playing a few dynamic tracks on my HiFi test playlist. Not sure if I need a new auxiliary amp to drive my front speakers now LOL

 

[khaliss]

-33 dB is quite alright. I’m sure the graph at the end indicated that it’s better than average, right?

What it means, is that you need the distortion to be -33 dB below the music signal levels to hear it, which translates to roughly 2% distortion. Meanwhile, your Marantz specifications are at 0.08%.

I'm a 50yr old guy with a minor hearing loss on my left ear (from a recent visit/test with at EENT clinic), so that probably didn't help with the results LOL

 

[khaliss]

by the way, here's the SPL stereo graph (1/6 smoothing) for my setup (REW)... I'm just using a generic Audyssey mic from my Marantz receiver (with the calibration file linked here on ASR by a youtuber), so it may not be super accurate... so I think my system is already decent(?), but hey I always keep wondering if I can make it better with a true HiFi amp. I do like a bit more bass with a warm-sounding system... so I'm totally cool with this not being flat-ish. Also, my small listening room has no treatments, and has laminate flooring

 

[Jimster480]

by the way, here's the SPL stereo graph (1/6 smoothing) for my setup (REW)... I'm just using a generic Audyssey mic from my Marantz receiver (with the calibration file linked here on ASR by a youtuber), so it may not be super accurate... so I think my system is already decent(?), but hey I always keep wondering if I can make it better with a true HiFi amp. I do like a bit more bass with a warm-sounding system... so I'm totally cool with this not being flat-ish. Also, my small listening room has no treatments, and has laminate flooring

View attachment 443948

If you like it to be more warm sounding then adjust your subwoofer gain and crossover / low pass filter

 

[Jimster480]

I did the test anyway, and I can only listen at -20db (80db?) on my Marantz AVR cuz wife is in the next room, didn't wanna annoy her too much lol... end result was -33 (is that okay?) I picked Tracy Chapman cuz I know the track well

I would make sure to do the test at the volume you are most likely to actually jam out to music with. If you normally listen much louder, it can have a profound effect on the result.
I did the test and put my laptop speakers on low... I didn't notice anything until 5% LOL
Shows how big the differences can be with volume and the speakers themselves.

 

[khaliss]

If you like it to be more warm sounding then adjust your subwoofer gain and crossover / low pass filter

oh yeah, I've spent a LOT of hours tweaking my system... calibrating back & forth, changing sub positions, phasing, crossover, & level/gain adjustments on everything LOL! I got 3 different subs of different sizes/characteristics... so it took some time to balance everything out! I literally tried everything possible to get the SPL graph results screenshot-ed above

 

[Jimster480]

oh yeah, I've spent a LOT of hours tweaking my system... calibrating back & forth, changing sub positions, phasing, crossover, & level/gain adjustments on everything LOL! I got 3 different subs of different sizes/characteristics... so it took some time to balance everything out! I literally tried everything possible to get the SPL graph results screenshot-ed above

That is awesome, tuning your system to what you like is the most important. It depends on how you use it and what you focus on. Especially if it doesn't annoy you. Since I am so distortion sensitive; it literally starts to annoy me as I wear headphones if the distortion is high.. In speakers around my house; it isn't so bad as I have other things in the background and I am not doing critical listening nor am I focused in a quiet setting (like when I listen to music while programming).

As for the test:
I just went to my workstation with my primary rig and much better headphones (trying first with Oppo PM-2 w/ PM-1 Pads) 0.03% was the best in the music (the next step of degradation I could hear using the THX 789 is 0.017%)... However The music is really at a low volume vs the rest of the song... I put my (Geshelli Archel 3 Pro) amp on MAX (5 oclock) on low gain... and I don't normally listen to music past 1 Oclock... so this also helps to mask distortion. With the 500hz tone... I heard distortion somewhere in 0.008 to 0.009... it was obvious to me that the tone had changed by that point. I tried it 5 times blind (funnily if I do it with my eyes open rather than closed and focusing on the sound... the best I got was 0.011% but I also got 0.023%).
On the 100Hz Tone my best is 0.004% (Using my THX AAA 789) vs 0.007% using the Geshelli Archel3 Pro @ MAX Low Gain & (0.009 w/ the volume down 25% from MAX), usually I was hitting stop around 0.013%.
Annoyingly the 500hz tone is much louder than the 100Hz tone (or its this headphone FR) and I had to turn the amp down some as it hurts... especially once distortion reaches past 0.5%... it becomes very fatiguing very fast.... I dislike that this test the 100Hz is less than 5 seconds from the 500Hz tone... So when I skip back in the track I can be blasted with the 500Hz tone again which HURTS at 10% Distortion especially.

I do note though that I have the volume higher than I normally would; but all his tests here are a much lower amplitude vs his voice... which is another reason why this video is bad. If I put the volume down to where I would listen at a "normal volume" using his voice as a reference.... my point of noticing on the 100Hz Tone is 0.085%. It becomes fatiguing and annoying by 0.2%... to the point that I skipped ahead to end the test faster because it was giving me a headache. On the music at such a low volume... it was near 0.9% but another time I stopped at 0.036% and another at 0.043%.

Volume makes the biggest difference, also concentration. If I am doing other things in the background... I notice on the music around 1% at a lower "normal" (to his voice) volume.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

I changed my front L/R crossover to 80Hz, making my subs work more & less the Marantz amp driving my ML electrostatics... definitely discernable improvement when playing a few dynamic tracks on my HiFi test playlist. Not sure if I need a new auxiliary amp to drive my front speakers now LOL

Your Marantz has significantly more power than the B100, and with an 80 Hz crossover, I’d imagine you’ve got plenty of headroom.

Since you've already concluded that switching amps wouldn’t improve sound quality, there’s really no technical reason to replace it.

 

[Jimster480]

Your Marantz has significantly more power than the B100, and with an 80 Hz crossover, I’d imagine you’ve got plenty of headroom.

Since you've already concluded that switching amps wouldn’t improve sound quality, there’s really no technical reason to replace it.

Yea, definitely has more power and plenty of headroom. Low frequencies eat up large amounts of power very quickly.
I'd still play around with amps and see.