Topping PA5 II Stereo Amplifier Review

[mike70]

Why do you speak in this way, like a wise old man, without actually saying anything helpful, with a tendency to belittle your interlocutor?

You're setting your feelings in my words, you don't know who I'm or my intentions. I can't be responsible for what happens in your mind... and let me repeat.. what I said is absolutely helpful and many with the same content received a "thanks" from you

I hope you finally get what you want and don't spend money on what isn't worth it, in this case amplifiers. Speakers and room acoustics are the real thing, amps, dacs, cables... are more marketing than game changers (if you follow audio science)

 

[DSJR]

Why do you speak in this way, like a wise old man, without actually saying anything helpful, with a tendency to belittle your interlocutor?

Hope I can respectfully chip in here -

I may not be that wise, but I am older now

One thing I discovered after many years demming gear (and selling a good deal too) is that equipment choice is a multisense experience in real terms, the looks, feel and touch playing a huge part as well as price of course. Our brains and the minds they contain within them, are incredibly fickle and so easily influenced, I do understand the totally objective stance expressed here, while accepting I may not like the looks, feel or build of some of the technical winners tested here

If the PA5 II looks and is priced the part, the tech performance seems to indicate that the amp will amplify a music signal transparently, not detracting from or adding to said signal in any audible way. You may still like the looks and feel of the Yamaha however, and that's something which will be pertinent to yourself and I guarantee, *will* have a bearing on your subjective judgement here. The Mini 300 amp is cheaper, as good on paper it seems, so maybe you could dip your toes with this one perhaps?

 

[Musictech77]

You're setting your feelings in my words, you don't know who I'm or my intentions. I can't be responsible for what happens in your mind... and let me repeat.. what I said is absolutely helpful and many with the same content received a "thanks" from you

I hope you finally get what you want and don't spend money on what isn't worth it, in this case amplifiers. Speakers and room acoustics are the real thing, amps, dacs, cables... are more marketing than game changers (if you follow audio science)

I know the importance of speakers and room acoustics, that s why I bought topping dx5ii dac which has the peq option. Iam happy with it. Iam not sure though if I ll finally use the peq or ik arc4. I already own this program and it's calibration mic. I ll do my tests and decide soon.
I placed carefully the speakers and some absorbing panels, so there is a minimal need for eq. I have big experience with that cause I work as a producer-musician. I have big experience also with studio monitors, mics, outboard but not with amps and generally hifi.
I agree, speakers and room acoustics are the real thing but I also found important differencies. between some amps and preamps some of them added a slight colouration and the result was less natural. Instruments-voices had a touch of unpleasant colour. It is very obvious in hi hats-cymbals-vocal sshess. Also some amps offered better low end and clearer mids,without lacking any of the mids. So, yes, i found that there are differencies between amps, but I haven't tried any modern amp though. I tried marantz pm68, denon 1080R,a custom design from a friend, 2 respectable preamps and the yamaha dsp A2070 as a power amp with dx5ii used as preamp. (was a flagship expensive model), which is my favourite combination until now.
Iam really interested to try the PA5II because it has really good specs and from what I understand it may suits me better cause it ll offer more clean and natural sound compared to the other amps I tried, but iam not completely sure if it ll offer a more "musical" sound that I ll prefer....
The last months I did a little journey where I tried some amps and speakers and I finally concluded what I want to hear from a hifi system, I have a bit different approach than my studio set up. I do not want to listen in a way that my studio monitors offer.
So, I need a system with natural sound, resolution and not hard edges(high mids is the area that I have problem with most amps and speakers).

Iam not also sure if the mini 300 can offer the same performance. If it is equal to the PA5II, I prefer the mini 300.

 

[Musictech77]

Hope I can respectfully chip in here -

I may not be that wise, but I am older now

One thing I discovered after many years demming gear (and selling a good deal too) is that equipment choice is a multisense experience in real terms, the looks, feel and touch playing a huge part as well as price of course. Our brains and the minds they contain within them, are incredibly fickle and so easily influenced, I do understand the totally objective stance expressed here, while accepting I may not like the looks, feel or build of some of the technical winners tested here

If the PA5 II looks and is priced the part, the tech performance seems to indicate that the amp will amplify a music signal transparently, not detracting from or adding to said signal in any audible way. You may still like the looks and feel of the Yamaha however, and that's something which will be pertinent to yourself and I guarantee, *will* have a bearing on your subjective judgement here. The Mini 300 amp is cheaper, as good on paper it seems, so maybe you could dip your toes with this one perhaps?

Hi. Iam not interested at all for the appearance of the amp.
Iam just looking for the best possible sound for my ears the last months. The problem is that I have big studio experience and my ears are very trained, so I can identify and listen to many differences between equipment. The other problem is that I do not want to spend a lot of money at the moment, that s why iam interested in PA5II or mini 300.
Check my previous post and you ll understand my situation. Thanks!

 

[mike70]

Your ears are trained with sighted and uncontrolled comparatives. What I mean with uncontrolled? You cannot see what amp is playing (all your senses helps the brain to "cheat you"), only use your ears... and you need to level the gain differences between the amps.

In that controlled listening experience, all the transistor amps with decent engineering will be more equal than different (unless you use real power hungry speakers in a big room, when only big power amps will maintain controlled distortion).

Try it. I do, that's why I say this, and is backed by science. We don't need to be "very wise", only to search for the good sources of information that really wise people left.

 

[Julf]

I agree, speakers and room acoustics are the real thing but I also found important differencies. between some amps and preamps some of them added a slight colouration and the result was less natural. Instruments-voices had a touch of unpleasant colour. It is very obvious in hi hats-cymbals-vocal sshess. Also some amps offered better low end and clearer mids,without lacking any of the mids. So, yes, i found that there are differencies between amps, but I haven't tried any modern amp though.

How did you "find" the differences? By sighted listening? How do you know the differences are actually real?

So, I need a system with natural sound, resolution and not hard edges(high mids is the area that I have problem with most amps and speakers).

What do you mean by "resolution"?

 

[Musictech77]

How did you "find" the differences? By sighted listening? How do you know the differences are actually real?

What do you mean by "resolution"?

sighted listening?I thought that that it was obvious i did listening tests.Why you said that?Did i say that i didn't use my ears?
I listened to specific songs that i know very well.i could identify differencies.why this sounds so strange to you?Music and equipment always was judged at the end by ears!Sound engineers do not buy monitors,consoles,mics,effects,preamps based only on their specs.They finally judge with their ears...and they are the people that make all the critical decisions for the music we like.
All the people in the music industry that have ''golden ears'' ,have some specific capabilities.All good sound engineers have trained ear and can identify problems ,the kind of those problems and the frequency of them.
so..i can identify problems and how some vocals-instruments must sound.I can also identify if a mix sounds better-clearer,if the seperation between instruments is better and if the sound is more punchy.All those aspects can be translated in technical terms but the final listening experience is not only technical terms.
Some companies also publish specs in a way that the final experience is different that on the paper...

**I understand the resolution as the ability of the system to play all frequencies in a way that you can focus in small details and identify characteristics of the sound.It is all about the clarity,accuracy and detail of the system.

 

[Julf]

sighted listening?I thought that that it was obvious i did listening tests.Why you said that?Did i say that i didn't use my ears?

So proper double blind? How did you do the tests? How did you match levels?

Sound engineers do not buy monitors,consoles,mics,effects,preamps based only on their specs.They finally judge with their ears...

Great - as long as it is *only* the ears. That means proper double blind listening tests.

**I understand the resolution as the ability of the system to play all frequencies in a way that you can focus in small details and identify characteristics of the sound.It is all about the clarity,accuracy and detail of the system.

And what actual, physical, measurable and verifiable things do you think affects "clarity, accuracy and detail of the system"?

 

[DSJR]

'Sighted' comparisons are when you know what's playing and most often can 'see' them as well (don't take it fully literally). My clumsy post above was trying to suggest that the other senses WILL determine how we perceive and *hear* a product, all else being equal with the amp immune to speaker loads (which are like rollercoasters, hence why almost all 'valve' amps 'sound different').

Most modern decent amplifiers *should* treat a music signal the same and basically output what goes in. What amps were typically used in the studios, do you know? I'm not baiting, just trying to help here.

These little amps seem to be incredibly good in terms of output and performance for such a low price. Used sensibly and if kept as cool as possible, they should last well too, with luck.

 

[antcollinet]

Ok.Which are it's power limits? Don't you think that class d amps do not sound the same as class A and class AB?

Has anyone any idea how it sounds compared to a Denon 1080R?

Sorry, but a frequency response is not only what defines the sound of an audio equipment. Many mics, speakers etc have similar response and the sound is much different not due to the freq response but due to other characteristics that define the character of them.

So, Iam just trying to figure out if the PA5ii can give me a nice, natural, musical and pleasing sound in the way some nice amps like the Denon, can offer. Of course I do not find that Denon is perfect. Do you think that topping amp could be better?

There is only frequency response, noise and distortion, that can change the sound. We can measure all of those to well below the levels of human hearing. When two devices both have inaudible noise, inaudible distortion, and frequency response flat to audible limits - then those two devices must sound the same. It doesn't matter what class they are.

Obviously if you don't have enough power for the volume you are listening at, and the amp clips, then that is distortion, and you'll hear a difference.


Yes, the PA5II can give you a "nice, natural, musical and pleasing sound in the way some nice amps like the Denon, can offer"

 

[Jarrett]

If you're put off by "Mini," it's the same dimensions as the PA5 II

 

[pedros_2005]

Hello. Do you think a 3e audio A5 amplifier would be superior to a Topping PA5 ii plus in terms of sound quality, considering that the 3e has sound bypass, has two TPA 3251 (dual mono circuit) and dual OPA 1656 compared to the ne5532 from the Topping?

 

[MAB]

Hello. Do you think a 3e audio A5 amplifier would be superior to a Topping PA5 ii plus in terms of sound quality, considering that the 3e has sound bypass, has two TPA 3251 (dual mono circuit) and dual OPA 1656 compared to the ne5532 from the Topping?

None of us can hear the difference between two amps like these, both with +- 0.1 dB frequency response in the audible band, > 104 dB SINAD, stellar multitone distortion. Unless one or the other was clipping, the Topping has ~20 Watts less power than the A5 into 4 Ohms which is really not a big deal unless you have low sensitivity speakers or play really loud.

None of the other stuff maters. OPA1656 sound no different than NE5532 unless the design is messed up. If it was, it would show up in the measurements.

 

[magreen]

Hello. Do you think a 3e audio A5 amplifier would be superior to a Topping PA5 ii plus in terms of sound quality, considering that the 3e has sound bypass, has two TPA 3251 (dual mono circuit) and dual OPA 1656 compared to the ne5532 from the Topping?

If I recall correctly, specifically for RCA input, the PA5 ii even shows superior measured distortion and noise compared to the 3e A5.

 

[MAB]

If I recall correctly, specifically for RCA input, the PA5 ii even shows superior measured distortion and noise compared to the 3e A5.

The reviews are available, so no need to recall :

Topping PA5 II Stereo Amplifier Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Topping PA5 II stereo balanced amplifier. It was sent to me by the company and costs US $219 (sale). There is a plus version with higher current power supply for $289.50. The fonts are hard to see but there is not much to read anyway. A power...

www.audiosciencereview.com

3e Audio A5 Stereo Amplifier Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the 3e Audio A5 Stereo class D amplifier. It was sent to me by the company and costs US $229.99. Despite its simplicity, the A5 has very well thought out features. Clipping indicators are provided for each channel. And selection of inputs is made...

www.audiosciencereview.com

They both have awesome RCA performance. The fact that the PA5 II's RCA SINAD performance is actually 1dB worse when both amps have inaudible noise and distortion is doubly inaudible.

Probably best to get the one with good customer support and after-sales service in your region.

 

[magreen]

The reviews are available, so no need to recall :

I was referring to Archimago's measurements as well. I believe they show the opposite RCA result versus Amir's measurements. Going back through and comparing the measurements for all four reviews isn't something I really fancied right now, so I was working from memory. But here's an example showing the Topping with better RCA measurements than the 3eA5, unless I'm mistaking something:

Part II: Topping PA5 Mk II Plus (PA5II+) Class D amplifier review. Power, Distortion, the Subjective and on Hi-Res amplification.

A blog for audiophiles about more objective topics. Measurements of audio gear. Reasonable, realistic, no snakeoil assessment of sound, and equipment.

archimago.blogspot.com

Part II: 3e Audio - A5 Stereo and A7 Mono Class D + PFFB, TI TPA3251/3255 Amplifiers - power, distortion, and the subjective. (And a few photos for Swifties.)

A blog for audiophiles about more objective topics. Measurements of audio gear. Reasonable, realistic, no snakeoil assessment of sound, and equipment.

archimago.blogspot.com

 

[Musictech77]

Most modern solid state amps can drive most speakers without any problem. There are a few speakers with very low impedance at some frequencies - they are a special case. "Matching" is a mostly meaningless audiophile term.

I don't have any experience with the mini300. Compare output power and impedance - that is where there are differences.

Thanks.
I d like to order PA5II or mini 300 in the next days but iam not sure yet which one to buy.

I find that "matching" in the audiophile world has more to do about covering faults of an equipment... For example a harsh in high mids speaker needs a scooped amp in that region in order to have a acceptable sound.
. Another example: if an equipment creates bad transients(they are more annoying in the high mids-highs) , then another part in the chain must tame those transients if we do not want a harsh sound.
That is what I understand about matching and it's meaning. There are not perfect speakers(or microphones) so I understand that people are looking for the suitable equipment in order to achieve the sound they are looking for. If we take into account the room acustics, the subject gets more complicated...

 

[Roland68]

Thanks.
I d like to order PA5II or mini 300 in the next days but iam not sure yet which one to buy.

Personally, I'd now opt for the Mini 300. Sonically, they're indistinguishable, and it has a more powerful switching power supply that's also significantly smaller.

I find that "matching" in the audiophile world has more to do about covering faults of an equipment... For example a harsh in high mids speaker needs a scooped amp in that region in order to have a acceptable sound.
. Another example: if an equipment creates bad transients(they are more annoying in the high mids-highs) , then another part in the chain must tame those transients if we do not want a harsh sound.
That is what I understand about matching and it's meaning. There are not perfect speakers(or microphones) so I understand that people are looking for the suitable equipment in order to achieve the sound they are looking for. If we take into account the room acustics, the subject gets more complicated...

Please don't take offense at my bluntness, but that's utter audiophile nonsense.

Why would anyone buy devices so poorly designed that they have to compensate for their shortcomings with an even worse-designed device? Who comes up with such nonsense? An amplifier that doesn't output a nearly linear signal is poorly designed. If this is audible, it can only be described as defective; why would anyone buy something like that?

The second point is even worse.
Your source material (music) represents 100% signal quality/output material (data). Any deviation from this means a loss of quality and a change to the original source material. Every further intervention to compensate for this only amplifies these effects. What you lose cannot be recovered or improved; it's a loss of the original signal.

Why would anyone have an interest in allowing devices to alter the signal uncontrollably?

 

[Ahmonge]

An amplifier that doesn't output a nearly linear signal is poorly designed

Absolutely! But the audiophile myth of tonal synergy is a blessing for manufacturers, so they will continue to propagate it.

 

[Musictech77]

Personally, I'd now opt for the Mini 300. Sonically, they're indistinguishable, and it has a more powerful switching power supply that's also significantly smaller.


Please don't take offense at my bluntness, but that's utter audiophile nonsense.

Why would anyone buy devices so poorly designed that they have to compensate for their shortcomings with an even worse-designed device? Who comes up with such nonsense? An amplifier that doesn't output a nearly linear signal is poorly designed. If this is audible, it can only be described as defective; why would anyone buy something like that?

The second point is even worse.
Your source material (music) represents 100% signal quality/output material (data). Any deviation from this means a loss of quality and a change to the original source material. Every further intervention to compensate for this only amplifies these effects. What you lose cannot be recovered or improved; it's a loss of the original signal.

Why would anyone have an interest in allowing devices to alter the signal uncontrollably?

As I wrote, there are not perfect speakers or rooms.
There are many harsh speakers in the market. Maybe some people enjoy the music more with an amp that "covers' this harshness,even it sounds wrong.

You do not know where the original sound material was mixed. We do not know how it sounded in the studio it was mixed and it's monitoring system.
It is a big question how the original material should sound. Who decides how the original material should sound? You, me or the people that created the music?
I mix and record and I ve tested many many studio monitors, from some hundreds euros to many thousands. . The sound differences are really big between them. So, we do not know how the original material sounded in the studio It was mixed. Have you ever had experience with yamaha ns10, a studio standard monitor that many albums were mixed? You ll be surprised from its sound. It is harsh and not full range. Different studio monitors have totally different sound. Tanmoys coaxial sound much different than genelecs, and they all sound much different than ns10....and the list goes on.
If we want to have a similar experience with the people who made and created the music we like, then we should have a similar system with them, with all its faults and characteristics.
From that fact we understand that the way we listen and perceive music is subjective. Not all people have the same needs from their sound system, nor do they want to hear the same things.