Hmm, first I thought this looked like a candidate for replacing my semi-broken (analogue inputs out of order) amplifier. Now I am less sure of this but then I already have a Phono amplifier (of unknown quality admittedly) and a better performing DAC can be bought even though I would prefer to keep the number of gadgets down.DAC and Phono measurements added to the review. Sadly both are subpar.
| Manufacturer | Type | Release year | Pot | Taps | High side/Center tap | Low side tap | Ref. 0dB [Hz] | 20Hz [dB] | 40Hz [dB] | 16kHz [dB] | 20kHz [dB] |
| Yamaha | AS700 | 2008 | 100k | variable | 27k,680p, 56n,2.7k | NA | 1440 | 21.5 | 20.1 | 8.0 | 8.3 |
Why? It's extremely comfortable and almost certainly not audibly worse than stand alone dacs that cost as much as the entire amp, loving measured high performance shouldn't make you lose touch with reality. I have the Yamaha a-s501 and I happily use the integrated DAC even if I have unused DACs like the dx3pro+, because it is simply more comfortable and I don't hear any differences.
Well, I can only recount what I felt at the time without reading the manual, but doing dems with the things and listening to music with some 'atmosphere' to it in both standard and 'Class A' settings. Fifty years ago now and as I said, I can' travel back with youthful hearing but with the accumulated experience and knowledge/research.Yes, huge dose of salt, which is why I posted some distortion data. The frequency response was regarding another anecdote I heard on ASR.
Yeah, if you read the Yamaha manual, follow their suggestion, and listen to 'serious music'... I guess your brain would lead you to believe Class A adds some magic.
View attachment 376784
I hope you realize 'venue acoustic' sounds like a description of a typical auditory hallucination.
I bought my Yamaha used as a trade-in it in at the store I worked at, hoping it would reproduce some of the magic I thought I heard in the Levinson Class A monoblocks we sold. The Yamaha provided a trivial way to test these notions, and ultimately helped me dispel that magic, playing a part in me learning that these suggested differences were parlor tricks.
This test on page 78 of Stereo Review helped too:
https://americanradiohistory.com/Archive-HiFI-Stereo/80s/HiFi-Stereo-Review-1987-01.pdf
And regarding 'properly reviewed' equipment, I learned that most of the print reviews weren't proper, and in fact misleading, as honest as carnival-barkers. All the while proper tests were being conducted:
Catalogue of blind tests
Do partially-sighted speaker faceoffs tally well with blind test results? If they can be shown to tally well then we we can trust many comparisons - anyone can do a face off (and many do...), while blind tests are too tricky for most to attempt. Example: Audio Musings by Sean Olive A blog...
No idea about your long-run RCA cable experiment. Yamaha does include the pre-out specs in their manuals of that era to help diagnose exactly what is going on when connecting other equipment, and for sure long RCA cable runs can be a problem with any gear. But your impression that one unit sounded "so much less 'dirty' and basically clearer" is indeed "Ho Hum", so IDK if you had a real issue, or an unverifiable impression as is often the case. One great thing about working at that stereo store, I had access to a few very practical people with vast technical expertise who taught me how to understand and address these types of issues. And these types of issues did come up, especially home and commercial install. For example, Niles had very specific guidelines for long run RCA, and provided specs and a list of remedies.
I own some classic Technics as well. They also sound (and measure) great.
The people in the know knew that the R-N803 has the same power amp section and thus amp performance. Differences are due to device and measurement variation.
To be honest, i don't think we see much better SINAD or power at 8 ohms. You really just buy the A-S1200 to be a hifi-jevel, not because of amplification performance.
I think i measured it's idle power usage against the A-S1200 once. The 701 was 20W, the A-S1200 was 40W.
I have tested the Fosi V3 against the A-S1200 power amp section for a few weeks. That is, i used the A-S1200 preamp in both cases, but switched to the Fosi V3 for a few weeks, then back. There was no audible difference to me.
Could be glucose or stress levels. Could be sighted bias.
I believe you pay for the high end luxury feel, not audible performance. Maybe a SINAD here, maybe some more current there, but not very audible i believe.
For the cost of earlier overtemp shutdown if you like to let it rip. A switch is cheaper than a larger heatsink, i guess. The Yamaha amps must have fantastic profit margins.
Simple: You set the volume during the day, in my case around 75dB on my SPL-meter. Then you turn down the volume at night using the Loudness control, not the Volume control, when the kids sleep. You get less volume, but bass and highs are still as loud, the music still sounds rich and doesn't fall apart at low volumes. That is all there is to it.
Brutal.
You can get it used for $150, that is a steal! And you get a used R-S700 for $250, that is just bonkers!
That sounds like capable kit, a good selection. Could you sell the MiniDSP and use the EQ of the Wiim Pro Plus? You would lose the ability to keep deep bass from the speakers.
They are line-out. Pre out would be the signal after all the knobs, but before the power amp.
I, too, own veils.
I guess there are zero people buying a A-S701 to use it as a DAC only.
They are, the R-N800a and R-N1000a have the same power supply and power amp.
I can assure you, the Class A mode provides no additional sense of 'atmosphere'. I use my Yamaha to this day, it still sounds as good as any amp I have, the only 'atmosphere' being the heat rising in Class A
. If you could hear Class A operation, you would be one remarkable human. Since people can't even hear a Levinson Class A vs. a Futterman vs. a Pioneer receiver, I simply don't agree. I linked the test in my last response, it is worth studying, and is one among many actual tests where sighted impressions give way to reality.
I heard what I thought I heard on a number of occasions playing with the 800 and 1000 in both forms and like I said, it was initially half a century ago experiences when I was still a teen and hopefully had far better hearing than I had now. I admit that *today,* it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference. And yes, I do know far more these days how easily fooled we are In this case, I posit that the severe loss in output power and possible soft clipping? may well have caused some compression to make reverb sound more 'vivid,' but once again I'm shooting in the dark so best I leave it eh?
I gave up years ago. Unsighted, neither I nor anyone else could tell a Niles install amp from an Audio Research. Unless you tried to drive Infinity Kappa with the Audio Research... It occurred to me if I were to rewire the store to play everything through some Niles amps in a closet, nobody would know the difference. I would read that old Stereo Review mag I linked earlier. It really dispelled any remaining notions I had about magic amps. Perhaps go get the AES paper that outlines the results of a decade of actual tests for these types of differences, and the types of tests that are demonstrate valid results.Okay, I give up
I lent the CA1000mk2 to a cousin-in-law as I had no use for it nor the space. He sat on it for a year or two and then sold it, which upset me (I said I didn't mind, but any proceeds from the sale must go to his young son). The only defence I can give about so many amps back then is the rats nest of wires internally and all the sub-assemblies, which I still feel aren't a good thing really.
www.audiosciencereview.com
Yamaha doesn't do model numbers like that. MK II really doesn't exist, it's second model in the same series to A-S 700 and you have A-S 801 with USB audio input and better integrated DAC but it's completely different modell numbering. I think R-N 1000a has the same power stage and there is old R-S 700 (with analog tuner). That's about it. Yamaha used to da xx1, xx2... model numbering but not MK and recently switched to xxxa at least for R-N series for now.
I for one believe you. But i also suspect what you heard was not what physically happened, as your ears aren't instruments, their results can't be repeated or calibrated. There was a time when i thought it makes sense to use a black sharpie, to paint the outer and inner edge of CDs, to get more out of them. At the time it was very real.
Hmm. I don't think there is such a thing.
