Sokel
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2021
- Messages
- 8,166
- Likes
- 8,605
In this case it seems it's not batch batch,but component related and not specific to one model.
It's these strange modules that fail repeatedly.
-
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
It's these strange modules that fail repeatedly.
Fair enough, in that case it could still be "batch" related though, batch in terms of manufacturing date range..
For example, may be Topping bought a bunch of "bad" caps, solder, or during the time period certain production tooling minor issues not known etc.. I didn't follow this super long thread, has Topping ever commented on the reported issues, and/or offered extended warranty?I have only owned one Topping product so far, but also know someone who has several for at least 3-5 years and have 0 issues, so far. Obviously in this case based on ASR members feedback the PA-5 seemed problematic, just not sure if the sample size is large enough for it to be considered something like the so called lemon, term used in cars.
Roland68
Major Contributor
This has nothing to do with the feedback from ASR members, PA5 and LA90 devices are failing for all customers.Fair enough, in that case it could still be "batch" related though, batch in terms of manufacturing date range..
I have only owned one Topping product so far, but also know someone who has several for at least 3-5 years and have 0 issues, so far. Obviously in this case based on ASR members feedback the PA-5 seemed problematic, just not sure if the sample size is large enough for it to be considered something like the so called lemon, term used in cars.
The problem is the stupid casting of the small signal boards.
Since there is no technically sensible reason to pot these modules, this was probably done solely to keep the circuit secret.
Funnily enough, that's exactly what caused the circuit to become public
When it came to potting the modules, they apparently made every possible mistake that could be made. I therefore assume that the necessary knowledge for this was not available, but no external knowledge was obtained either.
Since several modules worked again after removing the casting compound, only by cleaning and re-soldering, without replacing any components, it is also clear that it was not a heat problem.
So it has absolutely nothing to do with their other quality, which I actually think is good, but only with some untested and untested nonsense that they build into their top products.
And that's exactly what you can accuse them of.
Topping has built something into their devices that does not improve the devices and has no meaning or benefit for the customer.
It doesn't take much effort to test just a few of these modules under load in a small oven at 70-90° for several weeks or months.
The irony of all these is that potting (encapsulation) or conformal coating of PCB is often done to enhance product reliability
[Edit]
[Edit]
Last edited:
daniboun
Major Contributor
That what I explained in another thread :This has nothing to do with the feedback from ASR members, PA5 and LA90 devices are failing for all customers.
The problem is the stupid casting of the small signal boards.
Since there is no technically sensible reason to pot these modules, this was probably done solely to keep the circuit secret.
Funnily enough, that's exactly what caused the circuit to become public
When it came to potting the modules, they apparently made every possible mistake that could be made. I therefore assume that the necessary knowledge for this was not available, but no external knowledge was obtained either.
Since several modules worked again after removing the casting compound, only by cleaning and re-soldering, without replacing any components, it is also clear that it was not a heat problem.
So it has absolutely nothing to do with their other quality, which I actually think is good, but only with some untested and untested nonsense that they build into their top products.
And that's exactly what you can accuse them of.
Topping has built something into their devices that does not improve the devices and has no meaning or benefit for the customer.
It doesn't take much effort to test just a few of these modules under load in a small oven at 70-90° for several weeks or months.
The obsession with protection leads to crazy decisions.... Topping implemented a pseudo anti-reverse engineering strategy without going through quality control. By wanting to skip the steps we end up endangering our image.
And in the end we discover under the "secret box" a pair of Opa1612....
Last edited:
Roland68
Major Contributor
Yes, but people/companies with experience did that.The irony of all these is that potting (encapsulation) or conformal coating of PCB is often done to enhance product reliability
[Edit]
And there is already over 40 years of experience with it. Even in the 80s and 90s we potted highly sensitive HF technology in the hobby area, which then worked for several years. And that with the influences of heat, cold and water. But there were a few things to consider...
Young company making young company mistakes, even when the circuit engineering is brilliant.
In my experience these types of amps have earned their reputation, many of us aren't surprised. Check out the pre-amp output on the Fosi V3.
Sadly it's impossible to talk about it without inviting some people that like to add drama, so we don't.
True.
daniboun
Major Contributor
Certainly, but a young company that doesn't care about its mistakes will remain a bad young company.... Topping established in 2008 btw
There is a PA5 II now, so discussion of the PA5 in absence of that development seems to be more about history than current practice. And, that is on a different thread.
I'm sure that doesn't help the people that bought the PA5, which, with all it's pros and cons, is very on topic in THIS thread.
I do accept young and old company to make mistakes on design or longevity issues once a while, everyone makes mistakes. But the thing is that how they handled the malfunctioning units are what caught a lot of members here offguard and enraged on
daniboun
Major Contributor
Personally I turned the Topping page following a double problem with my LA90 and PA5. But I came to this alternative and this module is neck to neck with the PA5 / RA3
Check here
Check here
Understood; I was principally responding to the notion that “a young company that doesn't care about its mistakes will remain a bad young company.” Odd to say that they didn’t learn when they produced a revised product.
Guddu
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2020
- Messages
- 1,338
- Likes
- 1,312
It’s very difficult for a non- so-technically-DIY-aware user, like me and many more, to consider a module vs fully assembled and tested amplifier.
3e might just capture a bigger segment by offering a ready to use amplifier, provided the module is comparable with PA5.
I'd seriously contemplate whether it's worth repairing. My answer for me was "no"
You're literally 250 pages into a thread of comments complaining about a device that has very good measurements.
daniboun
Major Contributor
I spoke with the 3E Audio guy about this point. I wish he could offer a "ready to use amp."...
But for the moment he is going to ship to Amir a full assembled amplifier so we can have a real full review )
Open Mind Audio
Active Member
Fingers crossed my 15-month-old PA 5 is still working 100% fine, with about 3 hours daily use 4-6 days a week. (Set up in desktop config.)
Similar threads
