• 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!

WolfX700 Measurement of Benchmark AHB2 Power AMP

anmpr1

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
3,740
Likes
6,454
I agree about the limitations of the Quad 33 pre amp...
As I recall (doing this from memory which is not the best thing to rely upon sometimes) the 33 was an ergonomic goodie. The volume knob doubled as the on-off switch. If I'm not mistaken (I may be making this up) when you turned on the 33, the 405 would power up. I think the cable had a trigger switch. There were handy tone controls, but a kind of cheesy (that is, not Rolex quality) slider for balance. Phono boards were plug in modules that one could customize depending upon cartridge. Accessible from the back of the unit. I liked the grey and orange. Interesting color scheme. Most gear at that time was either silver or black.

Thinking back the 33/405 was one of the handful of components I wish I'd kept. Some people mark time by old girlfriends. I remember the past by gear I once owned! :cool:
 

Willem

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
3,725
Likes
5,356
Yes the Quad 33 was a very clever design with lots of ergonomic goodies that were relevant at the time (some still are). You indeed turned it on by turning the volume control, just as in traditional radios. So there never was a loud thud on turning it on. It had two power outlets at the rear to power a Quad power amp and an fm tuner. It had a phono input board that could be customized for your cartridge (the Shure V15iii needed that, but so did others) to match the capacitance and output voltage of the cartridge for flattest frequency response and optimal headroom, and it had a special tape input and output board to set sensitivities etc for European vs Japanese standards). It was deliberately bandwidth limited because in vinyl days there was no useful and clean signal input below about 25 Hz. And on top of Baxandall tone controls it had high frequency filters from three selectable frequencies (5, 7 and 10 kHz) and variable slope.
 

JohnYang1997

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
7,175
Likes
18,300
Location
China
Any chance you can give us a hint of what you are doing? Class D or Class AB? How much power?
It's been discussed in another thread. But first one is a 40-70W amp with sub -130db THD also better noise and CCIF IMD performance. There should be higher power models from 100-150W to 300W+.
Operation is class AB.
Same chassis as A90/D90. Desktop amp, with volume control, external power supply. probably as much information as I can give.
 

pjug

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 2, 2019
Messages
1,776
Likes
1,562
Thanks! Sorry I didn't see the other thread.
 

Tks

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
3,221
Likes
5,497
It's been discussed in another thread. But first one is a 40-70W amp with sub -130db THD also better noise and CCIF IMD performance. There should be higher power models from 100-150W to 300W+.
Operation is class AB.
Same chassis as A90/D90. Desktop amp, with volume control, external power supply. probably as much information as I can give.

I've never gotten anyone to ever explain to me what is the actual barrier to high performance power amplifiers John. The only thing I assume is, since the amount of power they're capable of, keeping that under control and preventing it from "leaking" and disrupting the rest of the amplification process is the reason why no one has come close in half a decade with even remotely competing with Benchmark in this field.

Since you are here on this forum more than other qualified people at times. Can you tell me.. What is it about power amps that just leaves companies unable to make ones that are incapable of coming close to a five year old design? What is the biggest problem? Is it just a case like the transition to op-amps and such where it's relatively new, and no one really cares or has reason to come up with better performing power amps to begin with (so they don't because off-the-shelf parts aren't as good). Or is it simply people are just incapable from a technological level of making such a thing? Like literally don't have the brains nor the parts required to actually construct a device that can rival this half-decade old design from Benchmark?

This has been on the back of my mind and I've been meaning to catch you in the right time but somehow always felt I shouldn't until now. Especially since you are now definitely someone seemingly who understands what it takes to build high performance products.
 

JohnYang1997

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
7,175
Likes
18,300
Location
China
I've never gotten anyone to ever explain to me what is the actual barrier to high performance power amplifiers John. The only thing I assume is, since the amount of power they're capable of, keeping that under control and preventing it from "leaking" and disrupting the rest of the amplification process is the reason why no one has come close in half a decade with even remotely competing with Benchmark in this field.

Since you are here on this forum more than other qualified people at times. Can you tell me.. What is it about power amps that just leaves companies unable to make ones that are incapable of coming close to a five year old design? What is the biggest problem? Is it just a case like the transition to op-amps and such where it's relatively new, and no one really cares or has reason to come up with better performing power amps to begin with (so they don't because off-the-shelf parts aren't as good). Or is it simply people are just incapable from a technological level of making such a thing? Like literally don't have the brains nor the parts required to actually construct a device that can rival this half-decade old design from Benchmark?

This has been on the back of my mind and I've been meaning to catch you in the right time but somehow always felt I shouldn't until now. Especially since you are now definitely someone seemingly who understands what it takes to build high performance products.
Two issues. And one leads to another in some way)
Power amps delivers(or needs to)much more current than headphone amps. Thus more beefy output stage needed. There are ICs that can deliver considerable amount of current but majority will take the route of discrete. Hence it needs more know how to design with stability and performance. Yamaha has been pretty good on this for very affordable price. At this stage one can achieve -110db harmonics and sub -100 thd+n.

Now it leads to the second issue. There's more current, the ground is very important. Traditional star grounding doesn't work anymore. And more exotic grounding scheme needs more care and know how too. And some method only works with one channel. Two channels with shared gnd can cause some methods to fail. Balanced connection is a solution for some. It's more noisy inherently but can solve the issue. I'm also still trying to get both channel low distortion at the same time it's looking good so far.

Lastly, power amps are expensive to make for the most part. So it still needs to be more expensive than headphone amps. Some tricks may be applied to achieve low cost, small footprint and high performance like external SMPS. It's not yet done in design so I cannot say for sure what would work.
 

Tks

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
3,221
Likes
5,497
Two issues. And one leads to another in some way)
Power amps delivers(or needs to)much more current than headphone amps. Thus more beefy output stage needed. There are ICs that can deliver considerable amount of current but majority will take the route of discrete. Hence it needs more know how to design with stability and performance. Yamaha has been pretty good on this for very affordable price. At this stage one can achieve -110db harmonics and sub -100 thd+n.

Now it leads to the second issue. There's more current, the ground is very important. Traditional star grounding doesn't work anymore. And more exotic grounding scheme needs more care and know how too. And some method only works with one channel. Two channels with shared gnd can cause some methods to fail. Balanced connection is a solution for some. It's more noisy inherently but can solve the issue. I'm also still trying to get both channel low distortion at the same time it's looking good so far.

Lastly, power amps are expensive to make for the most part. So it still needs to be more expensive than headphone amps. Some tricks may be applied to achieve low cost, small footprint and high performance like external SMPS. It's not yet done in design so I cannot say for sure what would work.

So you see how you laid out the reality of the issues that exist (sure you don't know the specificity of the PRECISE problems your SPECIFIC approach in design might have) but you have the basic understanding of where problems can form generally speaking. Does this mean everyone else aside from a few electrical engineering specialists simply don't even understand these seemingly basic front-facing realities? Or, is it simply a case of trying to address them while figuring out where good power supplies will be sourced from (since I assume you aren't designing power supplies as well?), and while keeping the design within reasonable cost - are these the actual barriers that prevent power amps materializing in the market that would challenge the Benchmark? Or is it the prior case where people just aren't verifying their designs, or simply can't figure out what parts to use or discrete implementations to undertake within budgetary constraints?

I just have a hard time trying to make sense of the reality - that even at prices higher than the ABH2, no one can match it's performance after all these years.. I recall the days you spoke about THX's feedforward error-correction approach was nothing too serious, or nothing that others themselves wouldn't be able to emulate with ease, it's just no one bothered to think about doing it for whatever reason. Now we see a few others I think like Schiit have shown, it's not really a problem if you just commit to designing your own (the Heresy I believe does it). And I think your A90 jewel of an amp also backs up your earlier sentiments that THX's performance isn't something special once the basic idea of their approach was adopted by other designers who -if serious enough- could best the THX approach (which you seemingly have plowed through, and put your money where your mouth was all those months ago).

My guess is companies simply don't care enough, as evidenced by consumers who possibly don't care enough, seeing as how passive speaker purchases are done by people too rich to even know what they're buying (and just buy whatever is presented best to them by salesmen), or simply older people (seeing as how younger folks don't buy speakers much, and if they do, they're powered versions). So to me I don't want to think anyone is actually incompitent to the degree I would have initially thought. I would more place my guess as to the lack of true performance power-amps is simply due to economic disinterest. And it being a more demanding and laborious process than designing headphone amps that sell easier/more numerously?
 

JohnYang1997

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
7,175
Likes
18,300
Location
China
So you see how you laid out the reality of the issues that exist (sure you don't know the specificity of the PRECISE problems your SPECIFIC approach in design might have) but you have the basic understanding of where problems can form generally speaking. Does this mean everyone else aside from a few electrical engineering specialists simply don't even understand these seemingly basic front-facing realities? Or, is it simply a case of trying to address them while figuring out where good power supplies will be sourced from (since I assume you aren't designing power supplies as well?), and while keeping the design within reasonable cost - are these the actual barriers that prevent power amps materializing in the market that would challenge the Benchmark? Or is it the prior case where people just aren't verifying their designs, or simply can't figure out what parts to use or discrete implementations to undertake within budgetary constraints?

I just have a hard time trying to make sense of the reality - that even at prices higher than the ABH2, no one can match it's performance after all these years.. I recall the days you spoke about THX's feedforward error-correction approach was nothing too serious, or nothing that others themselves wouldn't be able to emulate with ease, it's just no one bothered to think about doing it for whatever reason. Now we see a few others I think like Schiit have shown, it's not really a problem if you just commit to designing your own (the Heresy I believe does it). And I think your A90 jewel of an amp also backs up your earlier sentiments that THX's performance isn't something special once the basic idea of their approach was adopted by other designers who -if serious enough- could best the THX approach (which you seemingly have plowed through, and put your money where your mouth was all those months ago).

My guess is companies simply don't care enough, as evidenced by consumers who possibly don't care enough, seeing as how passive speaker purchases are done by people too rich to even know what they're buying (and just buy whatever is presented best to them by salesmen), or simply older people (seeing as how younger folks don't buy speakers much, and if they do, they're powered versions). So to me I don't want to think anyone is actually incompitent to the degree I would have initially thought. I would more place my guess as to the lack of true performance power-amps is simply due to economic disinterest. And it being a more demanding and laborious process than designing headphone amps that sell easier/more numerously?
That's the part I'm also quite confused about. Why there weren't many more high performance design? From what I know, there's a saying that 5% of the population accomplish their goal (or even have a goal to begin with). Even though 5% is a small number there should still be numerous people who can do this. It's just unclear why they didn't. Perhaps they didn't want to for some reason maybe this isn't their interests at all. Or I'm wise but not wise enough to adopt something more useful and meaningful and only minimal portion of population are like me? Idk. I thought about this for past two-three years. From earphones to amps.. Moondrop seems to still slaying the competition yet many people still like earphones turned horribly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tks

Tks

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
3,221
Likes
5,497
That's the part I'm also quite confused about. Why there weren't many more high performance design? From what I know, there's a saying that 5% of the population accomplish their goal (or even have a goal to begin with). Even though 5% is a small number there should still be numerous people who can do this. It's just unclear why they didn't. Perhaps they didn't want to for some reason maybe this isn't their interests at all. Or I'm wise but not wise enough to adopt something more useful and meaningful and only minimal portion of population are like me? Idk. I thought about this for past two-three years. From earphones to amps.. Moondrop seems to still slaying the competition yet many people still like earphones turned horribly.

Yeah it's just so weird. Audio is the one industry it seems spec literacy is nonexistant, or not cared about. More of a visual hobby it seems, or a "emotion" based one nearly completely with respect to the folks in the market for passives.

Moondrop Kanas Pro was great. I don't think I've seen anything measured with better THD (Sennheiser IE40 Pro get really close surprisingly enough). Also Kanas Pro's physical design was perfect for my ears (long bore for deeper insertion, and no idiotic "aesthetic" protruding vectors to hit the parts of your year). I can literally have the whole IEM hover without any of the metal housing touching my ear at all. All that contacts is the ear tips, and cable, that's now ergonomic the IEM itself is. After this, they just started putting out bullshit really.. Botched physical designs, and their acrylic IEM's that cost $600 or more just measured worse. The Kanas Pro was pretty Harman faithful, and with the low THD metric, it took EQ really well. Absolutely love it, and would love for it's shape to return some day.

One final question, and I promise I'll not bother you no more about it. That power amp you're testing the waters with... Release date will be before 2021? or after >_> (I know it's a dumb question because of Corona, validation, testing viability of manufacturing and all that). But assuming Corona went away tomorrow theoretically.. Would a 2020 release be even possible?
 

JohnYang1997

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
7,175
Likes
18,300
Location
China
Yeah it's just so weird. Audio is the one industry it seems spec literacy is nonexistant, or not cared about. More of a visual hobby it seems, or a "emotion" based one nearly completely with respect to the folks in the market for passives.

Moondrop Kanas Pro was great. I don't think I've seen anything measured with better THD (Sennheiser IE40 Pro get really close surprisingly enough). Also Kanas Pro's physical design was perfect for my ears (long bore for deeper insertion, and no idiotic "aesthetic" protruding vectors to hit the parts of your year). I can literally have the whole IEM hover without any of the metal housing touching my ear at all. All that contacts is the ear tips, and cable, that's now ergonomic the IEM itself is. After this, they just started putting out bullshit really.. Botched physical designs, and their acrylic IEM's that cost $600 or more just measured worse. The Kanas Pro was pretty Harman faithful, and with the low THD metric, it took EQ really well. Absolutely love it, and would love for it's shape to return some day.

One final question, and I promise I'll not bother you no more about it. That power amp you're testing the waters with... Release date will be before 2021? or after >_> (I know it's a dumb question because of Corona, validation, testing viability of manufacturing and all that). But assuming Corona went away tomorrow theoretically.. Would a 2020 release be even possible?
Should be in 2020.
 

Shangri-La

Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2019
Messages
90
Likes
32
In fact, more than one Chinese manufacturer has stated that they are developing a power amplifier that is less than half the price of AHB2 and meets or exceeds its performance.

Do we know when we can expect to see such products on the market?
 

Spocko

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 27, 2019
Messages
1,621
Likes
3,000
Location
Southern California
It's been discussed in another thread. But first one is a 40-70W amp with sub -130db THD also better noise and CCIF IMD performance. There should be higher power models from 100-150W to 300W+.
Operation is class AB.
Same chassis as A90/D90. Desktop amp, with volume control, external power supply. probably as much information as I can give.
So this is an integrated amp then?
 

tifune

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 18, 2020
Messages
1,085
Likes
769
. Hence it needs more know how to design with stability and performance. Yamaha has been pretty good on this for very affordable price. At this stage one can achieve -110db harmonics and sub -100 thd+n.

Would it be possible to get an example of a Yamaha that you're describing? I'm surprised at some of their published specs given the price point - some as high as $7500 for .07 THD. Whether or not that's audible is a different story but even pay-extra-for-the-frontplate McIntosh can do .005 for <$5k

Also, how's the amp coming? Was just thinking about picking up an AHB2 when I stumbled on this post
 

mdunjic

Active Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2021
Messages
173
Likes
168
THX designed the feedforward circuit that reduces crossover distortion (from A to B) - it is protected IP
Hmmm … not so fast … Quad “current dumping” was the very first commercial implementation (their 405 power amp extremely successful as such and won numerous highly acclaimed awards) of feed-forward error correction based design for eliminating crossover distortion … they patented it back in mid 70s … my 909 and 306 power amps still use exact same design

So to conclude with the hard fact … no THX did not ‘invent feed forward crossover distortion elimination’ with their AAA circuit design … it may be their own version of using feed forward for eliminating crossover distortion but let’s not give them too much credit … although I do believe their ABH2 is a great amp indeed
 

mdunjic

Active Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2021
Messages
173
Likes
168
As for the high input sensitivity of these older Quad amplifiers, that was a European standard that has been abandoned by the market. It has been reduced in more recent versions. In my case, I easily addressed it with 12 dB inline attenuators. My late model 405-2 and my 606-2 both have rca connectors. However, there are some who have argued that the DIN connectors actually make better contact.
905 is at 775mV to drive it to saturation
606 is at 500 mV
306 is at 375 mV
 

mdunjic

Active Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2021
Messages
173
Likes
168
I agree about the limitations of the Quad 33 pre amp. My first system, way back in the early 1970s consisted of Quad els57s driven with a Quad 33/303 combo. The sound was extraordinary, and I used the system until about ten years ago, when I replaced the speakers with the modern Quad 2805s. By that time we had moved into a large house with a large living room, and that, plus the lower efficiency of the 2805s meant that the 2x45 watt of the Q303 was no longer adequate. So I replaced it with the refurbished Q606-2. That made a noticeable improvement on more dynamic music. About a year ago I decided it was also time to replace the Quad 33 with a modern DAC with volume control. I bought the RME ADI-2 DAC and I have not looked back. It is a clearly better/cleaner preamp and allows the Q606-2 to shine.
On the other hand, only just before this I had some trouble with my 2805s and they needed to go in for repairs. Since I still own the ELS 57/Q33/303 set I pressed that back into service. There was nothing wrong with it. It was still a highly refined and transparent sound, better than most modern systems. But the ADI-2/Q606-2/Q2805 is clearly better in many respects. But I agree with that guy: the Q33 is not nearly as good as the Q405-2 or the Q606-2. Its strength is in what was needed most at the time: sophisticated and flexible gain staging for all the various sources and their different levels one had in the days of vinyl (including cartridges with many different signal levels and capacitance), tape decks and fm tuners. Plus refined tone control and filters.
Yeah … Quad preamps are Ok, but tbh nothing special … used 34, 99 and even CDP-2 as preamps for my 909s … good synergy but ultimate transparency was missing

If one adds higher quality preamp, with more transparency as a front end to any of Quad “current dumping” based power amps (405-2, 520f, 306, 606mk2, 707, 909, QSP or Artera) all of a sudden those power amps are happy … you can feel it … I am actually using THX AAA based MyTek Liberty as a preamp for my 909s and oh boy does it sing !
 
Last edited:

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,706
Likes
38,864
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
Hmmm … not so fast … Quad “current dumping” was the very first commercial implementation (their 405 power amp extremely successful as such and won numerous highly acclaimed awards) of feed-forward error correction based design for eliminating crossover distortion … they patented it back in mid 70s … my 909 and 306 power amps still use exact same design

So to conclude with the hard fact … no THX did not ‘invent feed forward crossover distortion elimination’ with their AAA circuit design … it may be their own version of using feed forward for eliminating crossover distortion but let’s not give them too much credit … although I do believe their ABH2 is a great amp indeed

Sansui were also doing feed-forward in the late 70s, early 80s. Denon also had a version of it.

AU-D11 block diag:

1640721682128.png
 
Top Bottom