-
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 PA5 Review (Amplifier)
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
MAB
Major Contributor
And they are still failing right out of the box:
Poll for Topping PA5 owners only please.
That's bad if it was supposed to be new, but to be honest, the part that is prone to failure has been replaced so your PA5's life expectancy will be that of a new PA5. Agree. But still adds some confusion to the whole PA5 story. So a while back John Yang posted that the reliability issue was...
www.audiosciencereview.com
And they are still failing right out of the box:
It's still a lemon, Topping and the resellers know and acknowledge it's a lemon, and that the encapsulation is the root case. Yet they still sell them.Poll for Topping PA5 owners only please.
That's bad if it was supposed to be new, but to be honest, the part that is prone to failure has been replaced so your PA5's life expectancy will be that of a new PA5. Agree. But still adds some confusion to the whole PA5 story. So a while back John Yang posted that the reliability issue was...
Dick Jones: I had a guaranteed military sale with ED209! Renovation program! Spare parts for 25 years! Who cares if it worked or not!
Yeah this is the perfect storm of a questionable product from China manufacturing and questionable support from Chinese retailer.... this sort of thing sours me on any Topping product going forward... I really cant expect any better from hifiexpress shenzen apos aoshida... this is the way it is.
Its really kind of sad in 2023 and even worse in that none of this is even unusual.
MAB
Major Contributor
I love your Robocop reference!
Almost, the worst part of the deal is the resellers. The amp is certainly defective, but the sale and support is from a bunch of con-artists.
A normal company SHOULD accept all unsold returns from resellers.
Like I have seen some Western stores refuse to sell a particular item due to the high RMA... this forced the manfacturer to take back all stock.. it was up to them to fix the item or... landfill it...
But its obvious here Topping dont want that shit back.
So to me why would a normal retail company sell something they know they will get returns on??? but then these four retailers are NOT normal retail companies.
Like I have seen some Western stores refuse to sell a particular item due to the high RMA... this forced the manfacturer to take back all stock.. it was up to them to fix the item or... landfill it...
But its obvious here Topping dont want that shit back.
So to me why would a normal retail company sell something they know they will get returns on??? but then these four retailers are NOT normal retail companies.
dsnyder0cnn
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2019
- Messages
- 585
- Likes
- 872
I wonder if Topping is sending @amirm a PA5 II or if one of us needs to do it. I'm not expecting numbers to be significantly different from the original, but I do appreciate Amir's consistency.
On power between the two versions, I'm not seeing a significant difference. Certainly not enough to justify the $80 difference in price.
Power output before knee into 4Ω
PA5 II in Blue, Plus in Red…too close to call.
Power output before kee into 8Ω
Same color assignments. The Plus has a tiny bit less distortion from 40 to 51 watts. Maybe the Plus delivers 54 watts to the PA5 II's 53 before distortion takes off.
If my math is right, that works out to 0.081 dB of extra headroom on the Plus. At a cost of $989 per dB for this extra headroom, the standard version seems to be the better value.
On power between the two versions, I'm not seeing a significant difference. Certainly not enough to justify the $80 difference in price.
Power output before knee into 4Ω
PA5 II in Blue, Plus in Red…too close to call.
Power output before kee into 8Ω
Same color assignments. The Plus has a tiny bit less distortion from 40 to 51 watts. Maybe the Plus delivers 54 watts to the PA5 II's 53 before distortion takes off.
If my math is right, that works out to 0.081 dB of extra headroom on the Plus. At a cost of $989 per dB for this extra headroom, the standard version seems to be the better value.
Sokel
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2021
- Messages
- 7,300
- Likes
- 7,531
You better buy the last one with the 210 W X 2,the other ones seems juiceless
Lräk
Member
Is it possible they are the same amp except for the 3A vs 4A power bricks?
dsnyder0cnn
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2019
- Messages
- 585
- Likes
- 872
Perhaps, but if so, I would expect more than a 0.1 dB difference in clean output from the amp with the bigger brick. Otherwise, why bother?
To others here, let me know if I'm reading this wrong.
It would not be difficult to design and use your own input stage, you are not limited to using topping's design
That's quite a compliment to compare the PA5 against a purifi, are you absolutly sure
Is there a Nad N23, can't find on a search
Killingbeans
Major Contributor
I think he means M23?
www.audiosciencereview.com
NAD M23 Stereo Amplifier Review
This is a review and detailed measurements of the NAD M23 Class D stereo power amplifier. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $3,749. The M23 sports the nice look of other "Masters" series NAD product including substantial weight for a class D amplifier. The only miss is the touch...
www.audiosciencereview.com
Sorry, both are revised? Revised from what, are there revised verions of these amps
I think he means M23?
NAD M23 Stereo Amplifier Review
This is a review and detailed measurements of the NAD M23 Class D stereo power amplifier. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $3,749. The M23 sports the nice look of other "Masters" series NAD product including substantial weight for a class D amplifier. The only miss is the touch...
This little PA5 is being compared against some good stuff
on the cleanliness of power, yes. PA5 of course can't compare with purifi on power. longevity is another difference. Purifi is one of the "end game" amplifiers, you would never need more than that.
I meant NAD M23 which is purifi based IIRC - not N23, my bad.
DSJR
Major Contributor
At the end of its life, the Cyrus 2 really needed the add-on PSX power supply to be competitive, the sound a bit too 'lean' and gutless without it (the volume levels we played at). Cyrus were into 'dealer contracts' at this time, so we never bothered with them after 1993, so not sure how the Cyrus 3 and future models panned out.
Is this the beginning of the end for topping, the pa7 was nothing to write home about - where to nowAnd they are still failing right out of the box:
It's still a lemon, Topping and the resellers know and acknowledge it's a lemon, and that the encapsulation is the root case. Yet they still sell them.Poll for Topping PA5 owners only please.
That's bad if it was supposed to be new, but to be honest, the part that is prone to failure has been replaced so your PA5's life expectancy will be that of a new PA5. Agree. But still adds some confusion to the whole PA5 story. So a while back John Yang posted that the reliability issue was...
Only being a casual reader of this site sometimes, I find the obsession with SINAD beyond the point of audibility and the promoting of audio products as exemplary simply on that measure to be rather odd. For me, an exemplary audio product will be one that lasts a long time.
Measurements are helpful in finding such a quality product, but I also research the company to see what kind of track record they have for making quality products and what kind of customer support they offer. I also like to see the internal build quality to determine as best I'm able from the limited bit I've learned so far and from seeking out comments and reviews from people with demonstrated expertise that the build quality is indeed high quality.
From what I can tell on ASR, if a product meets a limited set of measurements that's the totality of what it takes to get a rave review. It's no wonder to me then that such products are then being found to be less than high quality products in the long run. The products could or could not have longevity, but when one doesn't even explore the additional criteria that makes audio products, or any products really, high quality and worth the money to purchase, then one takes a greater gamble in being disappointed.
The odd part for me on ASR is that extensibly it's supposed to be a forum for rationality about audio products, and yet many members persist in what I'd call tunnel vision in accounting for only a very narrow measurement criteria, and that seems as irrational as other areas of the audio hobby with just a different focus.
Measurements are helpful in finding such a quality product, but I also research the company to see what kind of track record they have for making quality products and what kind of customer support they offer. I also like to see the internal build quality to determine as best I'm able from the limited bit I've learned so far and from seeking out comments and reviews from people with demonstrated expertise that the build quality is indeed high quality.
From what I can tell on ASR, if a product meets a limited set of measurements that's the totality of what it takes to get a rave review. It's no wonder to me then that such products are then being found to be less than high quality products in the long run. The products could or could not have longevity, but when one doesn't even explore the additional criteria that makes audio products, or any products really, high quality and worth the money to purchase, then one takes a greater gamble in being disappointed.
The odd part for me on ASR is that extensibly it's supposed to be a forum for rationality about audio products, and yet many members persist in what I'd call tunnel vision in accounting for only a very narrow measurement criteria, and that seems as irrational as other areas of the audio hobby with just a different focus.
Last edited:
MAB
Major Contributor
Yeah, it is indeed pointless to chase noise and distortion beyond a threshold. Especially if quality and reliability suffer or are left unaddressed. Certainly, Topping is not providing a good quality/reliability story.
However. At least half of the story here is the reseller's behavior to the customers, and lack of execution in honoring warranty. That can't be tested. But at least ASR has a thread devoted to this.
Poll for Topping PA5 owners only please.
Poll for PA5 owners to report product defects. Discussion for any solutions. I think it would be useful to get a handle on some numbers to estimate just how wide spread the issues are. Addendum: Here is Topping's response to the PA5 issues...
www.audiosciencereview.com
Topping PA5 fix - D01 Module Replacement for everyone
Ive been working on the PA5 for a while now after mine died suddently, like many others https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/poll-for-topping-pa5-owners-only-please.33293/ Most of the PA5 units develop a crackling, hissing or just go a little silent or completely dead on...
www.audiosciencereview.com
).Speaking of things that are hard to test, reliability testing is something way outside of the scope of any review. It's not a matter of turning the volume up and seeing if it breaks. Even baking a part and operating it to the point of failure, calculating the time to fail statistics on a sample of many units (Weibull analysis), will only capture a part of the reliability picture. And destroy all of the parts. And on most products, this has to be done on subassemblies. It's way outside of scope, which is why good companies fight hard to build a reliability culture against the usual forces of cost and lack of accountability to the customer. Topping has chosen to encapsulate portions of their design without understanding or planning for the actual reliability degradation that inherently happens when you encapsulate electronics.
To me it's mixed bag, but I have to give credit to ASR for at least being part of the quality story, even if I quality/reliability testing is unrealistic to incorporate into a review.
And, I have compression drivers in one of my active speaker builds, so I actually appreciate the discussions of noise and harmonics, since it does matter, at least to a point. I also have Bryston amps, and value their longevity and customer service. And I got burned on a PA5 (mine was the one gamerpaddy used to develop the mod...) so I am not likely going to buy again from Topping, unless they clearly turn a corner. And likely never from this group of resellers, they are half of the problem, so that rules out lots of other high-SINAD devices that I don't need!!! And there are tons of products here that are stellar, both in measurements and reputation for reliability. Like MiniDSP, which offers performance and fantastic features (DSP) and a good customer experience and service.
That would be odd - it is why the vast majority of people here don't do it.
Good sound is just a first requirement. Once the measurements (And there are many more measurements than just SINAD) of a group of devices show they have SOTA audio capabilities, there are enough of them that you can now select based on other criteria - features, aesthetics, price - and yes, expected quality and after sales from the brand. If you look rather than just jumping on the "ASR only care about SINAD" Strawman, you'll find many posts stating just that.
Similar threads
