Topping PA5 II Stereo Amplifier Review

[magreen]

If not clipping the PA5 will sound the same as your ncore.

Thank you. Would you say the same of the 3e Audio A5? If so, which would you recommend between the two?

 

[JeremyFife]

Thank you. Would you say the same of the 3e Audio A5? If so, which would you recommend between the two?

Agree with @antcollinet about the PA5 II. The 3e A5 will also sound the same (given the same constraints).

Choose on features, aesthetics and - probably the deciding factor - the warranty/return policy of the sellers near you. I don't think anything will go wrong, but if it does then having to ship something back to China is a pain.

 

[DVinylfan]

In case you haven't seen it, Topping has recently released an amplifier which appears functionally almost identical to the PA5 II, but is less money:

'Topping’s new amplifier - Mini300' https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/topping’s-new-amplifier-mini300.67036/

 

[Lasker]

Off topic, if I wanted to sell a pa5 ii plus is there a specific space to sell in this forum?

 

[magreen]

In case you haven't seen it, Topping has recently released an amplifier which appears functionally almost identical to the PA5 II, but is less money:

'Topping’s new amplifier - Mini300' https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/topping’s-new-amplifier-mini300.67036/

Thank you -- have you seen any measurements of it yet? Do we know what is under the hood?

 

[magreen]

Agree with @antcollinet about the PA5 II. The 3e A5 will also sound the same (given the same constraints).

Choose on features, aesthetics and - probably the deciding factor - the warranty/return policy of the sellers near you. I don't think anything will go wrong, but if it does then having to ship something back to China is a pain.

Thanks.

Question: is the PA5 ii a dual 3251 or a single? There's not a lot of information, but the info I can find suggests it's a single.
If so, would that make it more comparable to the 3e Audio A5se? And then the A5 would be a step up in sound quality?

 

[staticV3]

Off topic, if I wanted to sell a pa5 ii plus is there a specific space to sell in this forum?

Audio Equipment For Sale or To Buy

Please note: you must be a Forum Donor to create threads/post items for sale here. This is done to reduce the probability of scams.

www.audiosciencereview.com

Only forum donors can put items up for sale, a measure to prevent scams.

 

[antcollinet]

Thank you. Would you say the same of the 3e Audio A5? If so, which would you recommend between the two?

Yes, the same.

Personally I'd get the 3eAudio - but mainly because I have a bias against Topping.

 

[Roland68]

Thanks.

Question: is the PA5 ii a dual 3251 or a single? There's not a lot of information, but the info I can find suggests it's a single.
If so, would that make it more comparable to the 3e Audio A5se? And then the A5 would be a step up in sound quality?

The PA5 II and the A5se each use one TPA3251 driver, while the A5 uses two.
The advantage of the A5 with two TPA3251 drivers is its ability to handle 2-ohm loads, making it suitable for speakers with a minimum impedance below 4 ohms.

You shouldn't expect any difference in sound quality.

 

[magreen]

The PA5 II and the A5se each use one TPA3251 driver, while the A5 uses two.
The advantage of the A5 with two TPA3251 drivers is its ability to handle 2-ohm loads, making it suitable for speakers with a minimum impedance below 4 ohms.

You shouldn't expect any difference in sound quality.

Thanks for the reply. Should one then expect equal sound quality between the A5se and A5 when using 4ohm or 8ohm loads? (Aside from the extra 10W output power in the A5)

Wouldn't there be some advantage to dual chips in crosstalk between channels, or some other advantage?

 

[Roland68]

Thanks for the reply. Should one then expect equal sound quality between the A5se and A5 when using 4ohm or 8ohm loads? (Aside from the extra 10W output power in the A5)

Wouldn't there be some advantage to dual chips in crosstalk between channels, or some other advantage?

The crosstalk of the A5 is marginally better, presumably due to the two TPA3251 chips, but it's also excellent with the PA5 II and A5se, and no worse than with the NCore amplifiers previously measured on ASR.

You won't go wrong with either amplifier. The A5 is more versatile for future speakers because it also drives speakers with more demanding impedances well, although I haven't had any problems with the PA5 II in that regard either.

 

[magreen]

If not clipping the PA5 will sound the same as your ncore.

I am wondering about this PA5 II distortion+noise graph below. For me, the high frequencies of violins in their upper registers in classical music (often labeled sparkle and air) is a key part of my listening experience. I understand this tends to be in the 8kHz-12kHz region or even higher. The PA5 II distortion+noise at high frequencies shown below looks potentially troublesome in those registers.

I'm not looking to win measuring contests, I'm looking to enjoy the music. I was pleased with my departed Channel Islands dual ncore architecture amp. For its replacement, would I be better served by something frequency independent like the Topping B100, also copied below?

 

[staticV3]

I am wondering about this PA5 II distortion+noise graph below. For me, the high frequencies of violins in their upper registers in classical music (often labeled sparkle and air) is a key part of my listening experience. I understand this tends to be in the 8kHz-12kHz region or even higher. The PA5 II distortion+noise at high frequencies shown below looks potentially troublesome in those registers.

I'm not looking to win measuring contests, I'm looking to enjoy the music. I was pleased with my departed Channel Islands dual ncore architecture amp. For its replacement, would I be better served by something frequency independent like the Topping B100, also copied below?


View attachment 499580

View attachment 499582

See here:

Is SINAD around 5-15 KHz relevant?

I’m trying to build some active 3-way bookshelves. At this point, I need to decide for amp selection for my high frequency >2.5 KHz. I love Hypex products and will be powering the low end and midrange with hypex modules. I’m a bit hesitant about the tweeter amplification. Most newer class D...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[magreen]

See here:

Is SINAD around 5-15 KHz relevant?

I’m trying to build some active 3-way bookshelves. At this point, I need to decide for amp selection for my high frequency >2.5 KHz. I love Hypex products and will be powering the low end and midrange with hypex modules. I’m a bit hesitant about the tweeter amplification. Most newer class D...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Thank you. Very interesting thread. My takeaway is that, due to the spectral distribution of musical loads, for a given total output power, the amplifier only sends 5% of that output power through the tweeter at 5kHz, 2.5% of the power @10kHz, and 1% of the power @ 15Khz. (Assuming it scales linearly from your 400W example in post #6 in that thread).

Applying linearly (an assumption) to the PA5 II, let's say the total amplifier output power is 40W. So that would be ~ 2W @5kHz, 1W @10kHz, and 400mW @ 15Khz.

Please let me know if any of my math or assumptions are wrong.

Looking at the graph of the PA5 II above, it shows rising distortion @ 15Khz between 200-500mW, approaching -75dB TH+D at 500mW.
By contrast, the A5 graph below stays roughly flat @ 15 kHz from about 200mW-500mW, around -80 dB TH+D.

Could -75dB vs. -80dB THD+N @ 15Khz be an audible difference in treble reproduction between the two amps?

 

[mike70]

You can test how much distortion you can hear (https://klippel.de/listeningtest/)

I'm sure you'll have shocking results, 70dB thd are normally "transparent" to many.

SINAD measurements are generally more used to evaluate the price / performance ratio than searching for an audible difference

 

[Julf]

Could -75dB vs. -80dB THD+N @ 15Khz be an audible difference in treble reproduction between the two amps?

No. Distortion at 15 kHz is not audible - at any level - as the first distortion components are at 30 kHz.

 

[magreen]

No. Distortion at 15 kHz is not audible - at any level - as the first distortion components are at 30 kHz.

Ah ha! That's why it's helpful to know what you're talking about.

So do I have it correct that the 15kHz and 10kHz THD+N vs. power level plots are meaningless from an audio perspective, and only relevant from an engineering perspective? What about the noise component?

 

[staticV3]

What about the noise component?

The noise component is stimulus frequency agnostic and most accurately represented by Amir's DR/SNR measurements at the beginning of his reviews.

 

[magreen]

Great, thanks to both of you! I was reviewing Archimago's THD vs. frequency plots for this same amp. At first I thought they disagreed with Amir's results @ 5W for 10kHz and 15kHz.

Now I think I finally understand -- Archi is flatlining the THD for each harmonic as that harmonic goes above 20kHz, because it's no longer audible. So, second harmonic flatlines at 10kHz, third at 6.7 kHz, fourth at 5 kHz. Thus Archi is able to conclude that the THD+N -- for audible distortions -- doesn't get any worse than -97dB at any frequency. Am I understanding correctly?

 

[staticV3]

Am I understanding correctly?

Yeah as the harmonics move outside of the measurement bandwidth, the graphs become a bit funky.

More technically correct would be for REW to just stop drawing the line at that point, but it looks like (at least at some point) @JohnPM decided to have it repeat the last valid measurement value until the end.