- Thread Starter
- #141
Adding on, that makes the cord more flexible (since it is thinner) so less of an aggravation to manage all the wires.
Does the power brick have a C8
But not in that colour please!
I don't know if my experience is statistically significant, and I don't have any data on this, but in my journey trough hifi, I don't think a power amp ever failed on me where most other stuff did way more often. Preamps, cd players, radio tuners, turn tables, etc. with the part count way higher, the mechanics, the pots, the switches etc, I would have thought that risk of failure is higher. And yes I also had a computer audio interface die too.I would disagree that power amplifier are least reliable due to high V & I. Statistically it depends on how good that company's design, their QA and manufacturers' process.
Even though with 2 of their products having design failure, I applaud them for their willingness to come out designs that are priced favourable.
I don't know if my experience is statistically significant, and I don't have any data on this, but in my journey trough hifi, I don't think a power amp ever failed on me where most other stuff did way more often. Preamps, cd players, radio tuners, turn tables, etc. with the part count way higher, the mechanics, the pots, the switches etc, I would have thought that risk of failure is higher. And yes I also had a computer audio interface die too.
When I used to repair electronics, amplifiers were by far the most common.
I was stunned to see this disclaimer and now 3 or 4 pages into this review nobody has mentioned it.....P.S. Power amplifiers are least reliable audio products (due to high currents and voltages involved). New designs sometimes need to prove themselves in this regard. So if you are risk averse, please don't be the first to purchase this amplifier....
I think that all this does not come down to a failure alone,which can happen to every amp but to the difficulty,cost and wait-time of service.Yesterday, I asked the question on another thread why the Topping PA5 was still being recommended on the original review page (I was considering ordering one until I learned of the failures) considering what appears to have a pretty bad track of reliability. Someone on that thread couldn't answer my question directly but did provide this disclaimer that appears at the end of this amplifier review.
I was stunned to see this disclaimer and now 3 or 4 pages into this review nobody has mentioned it.
Now, I'm a pretty casual lurker on this forum, but I've never seen anything like this here or on other review/discussion forums. How can a product receive a high recommendation for its performance and then have this disclaimer attached to it? Would this be acceptable for Benchmark or Purifi amplifiers? Or Parasound and Crown amplifiers for that matter?
I think I can appreciate the intent of this disclaimer because of voltages involved, but I doubt that most commercial amplifier companies have more than a 1 or 2% failure rates of their amplifiers in the field in the first 5 years. Is Topping getting a pass here on amplifier reliability because they measure well? Shouldn't they be required to meet the same reliability standards as other companies being recommended here even if it means a slightly higher cost to build it?
If Topping can design an amplifier that measures this well, it seems to me they can also design it to last trouble free for a reasonable period of time like other appliances in our homes (10-15 years?). No piece of audio equipment getting a recommendation here should be receiving a disclaimer like this about potential reliability issues, imo.
For the sake of argument, I would suggest mechanical components in our systems are the most prone or likely for failure, before amplifiers. Reel to reel tape decks, cd transports, and turntables probably have a higher service/failure rate than commercially made amplifiers.
No flames at Topping, I have and enjoy daily a DX7 Pro dac, which btw has been trouble free since I purchased it new several years ago.
Yesterday, I asked the question on another thread why the Topping PA5 was still being recommended on the original review page (I was considering ordering one until I learned of the failures) considering what appears to have a pretty bad track of reliability. Someone on that thread couldn't answer my question directly but did provide this disclaimer that appears at the end of this amplifier review.
I was stunned to see this disclaimer and now 3 or 4 pages into this review nobody has mentioned it.
Now, I'm a pretty casual lurker on this forum, but I've never seen anything like this here or on other review/discussion forums. How can a product receive a high recommendation for its performance and then have this disclaimer attached to it? Would this be acceptable for Benchmark or Purifi amplifiers? Or Parasound and Crown amplifiers for that matter?
I think I can appreciate the intent of this disclaimer because of voltages involved, but I doubt that most commercial amplifier companies have more than a 1 or 2% failure rates of their amplifiers in the field in the first 5 years. Is Topping getting a pass here on amplifier reliability because they measure well? Shouldn't they be required to meet the same reliability standards as other companies being recommended here even if it means a slightly higher cost to build it?
If Topping can design an amplifier that measures this well, it seems to me they can also design it to last trouble free for a reasonable period of time like other appliances in our homes (10-15 years?). No piece of audio equipment getting a recommendation here should be receiving a disclaimer like this about potential reliability issues, imo.
For the sake of argument, I would suggest mechanical components in our systems are the most prone or likely for failure, before amplifiers. Reel to reel tape decks, cd transports, and turntables probably have a higher service/failure rate than commercially made amplifiers.
No flames at Topping, I have and enjoy daily a DX7 Pro dac, which btw has been trouble free since I purchased it new several years ago.
How I interpret these reviews is purely technical. Not about all the other stuff around it. Even taking price into account is a debate. For me the panther only shows technical performance, nothing else.Yesterday, I asked the question on another thread why the Topping PA5 was still being recommended on the original review page (I was considering ordering one until I learned of the failures) considering what appears to have a pretty bad track of reliability. Someone on that thread couldn't answer my question directly but did provide this disclaimer that appears at the end of this amplifier review.
I was stunned to see this disclaimer and now 3 or 4 pages into this review nobody has mentioned it.
Now, I'm a pretty casual lurker on this forum, but I've never seen anything like this here or on other review/discussion forums. How can a product receive a high recommendation for its performance and then have this disclaimer attached to it? Would this be acceptable for Benchmark or Purifi amplifiers? Or Parasound and Crown amplifiers for that matter?
I think I can appreciate the intent of this disclaimer because of voltages involved, but I doubt that most commercial amplifier companies have more than a 1 or 2% failure rates of their amplifiers in the field in the first 5 years. Is Topping getting a pass here on amplifier reliability because they measure well? Shouldn't they be required to meet the same reliability standards as other companies being recommended here even if it means a slightly higher cost to build it?
If Topping can design an amplifier that measures this well, it seems to me they can also design it to last trouble free for a reasonable period of time like other appliances in our homes (10-15 years?). No piece of audio equipment getting a recommendation here should be receiving a disclaimer like this about potential reliability issues, imo.
For the sake of argument, I would suggest mechanical components in our systems are the most prone or likely for failure, before amplifiers. Reel to reel tape decks, cd transports, and turntables probably have a higher service/failure rate than commercially made amplifiers.
No flames at Topping, I have and enjoy daily a DX7 Pro dac, which btw has been trouble free since I purchased it new several years ago.
I wouldn't recommend PA5 to anyone at this point, not even purchasing used although mine worked perfectly fine. But I wouldn't be too concerned with LA90D either as the previous version appears to work fine.I was stunned to see this disclaimer and now 3 or 4 pages into this review nobody has mentioned it.