Audiolab 8200a amplifier - opinions?

[plastic penguin]

Back on topic - the problem Audiolab have, like Arcam, Rotel etc., is they have such a good reputation from years gone by, that any product they launch, along with hot competition, comes with lots of baggage or "expectancy". To that end, it's important to judge the amp on it's own terms; to assess it on it's strengths rather than playing too much on past achievements or on current, rival brands. Most amps have their own distinct talent, regardless of review findings.

 

[Andrew Everard]

Can't help feeling you may be overthinking this one...

 

[plastic penguin]

Andrew Everard:Can't help feeling you may be overthinking this one...

You're right, I am overplaying it a little. It also comes with a healthy dose of reality, given I recently agonised over changing my Arcam. We've all been there at some point, difference being is I'm conveying what I felt then and now...

Yours, Mr. philosophical...

 

[AL13N]

Clare Newsome:We are hoping (but not yet certain) to get an Audiolab amp in for our January issue (out @10th December), where we'll have our biggest-ever one-make hi-fi systems tests - set-ups where all the kit comes from the same (or close sibling) manufacturer
audioaffair:Just confirmed - unfortunately these have been pushed back to January, IAG only have the 8200CD and 8200CDQ in stock now.
Seeing as Audiolab and Quad are "siblings" under IAG, how about including the following in the test...

Audiolab 8200CDQ > Quad 11L Active

...hooked up with a pair of XLR cables, it would make a simple 3-box setup.

 

[Frank Harvey]

plastic penguin:Back on topic - the problem Audiolab have, like Arcam, Rotel etc., is they have such a good reputation from years gone by, that any product they launch, along with hot competition, comes with lots of baggage or "expectancy". To that end, it's important to judge the amp on it's own terms; to assess it on it's strengths rather than playing too much on past achievements or on current, rival brands. Most amps have their own distinct talent, regardless of review findings.
I think this 8200 range will bring back Audiolab as a serious hi-fi brand - this is the range is that they should've produced when it was relaunched under IAG.

 

[plastic penguin]

FrankHarveyHiFi:plastic penguin:Back on topic - the problem Audiolab have, like Arcam, Rotel etc., is they have such a good reputation from years gone by, that any product they launch, along with hot competition, comes with lots of baggage or "expectancy". To that end, it's important to judge the amp on it's own terms; to assess it on it's strengths rather than playing too much on past achievements or on current, rival brands. Most amps have their own distinct talent, regardless of review findings. I think this 8200 range will bring back Audiolab as a serious hi-fi brand - this is the range is that they should've produced when it was relaunched under IAG.

Should be interesting... good stuff.

 

[Anonymous]

Have retailers started to receive CDQ stocks then? This is the one I'm interested in trying.

 

[audioaffair]

IAG have shipped CD and CDQ to retailers in limited numbers - the others are all due early next year.

 

[Anonymous]

Glad my post was useful to a few people. Can't really add anything more, as the 8200A is now boxed-up, ready to go back. The Arcam A38 is already waiting in the shop for me... Christmas has come early this year!

TheHomeCinemaCentre:

We just got ours this afternoon- the 8200a and 8200CD. My initial impressions are superb. Build quality is a real stand out at the price point, the amp has a real weighty feel to it and the buttons/dials all react accurately with a solid feel to them. It is too early to say on the sound quality - but we have the amp running the Kef Muons to get it warmed up and it is not embarrassing itself.

Hopefully we will get a chance to test it properly tomorrow.

Fascinating - "unequally yoked" comes to mind, but at least you can be confident that the speakers are not likely to be a problem! I look forward to reading your evaluation in due course.

Grottyash:

...I thought the sound lacked midrange, had too much top but was ultimately insipid. That might have been because everything else I'd heard that day was mostly driven by valve amps...

"Lack" of midrange may be harsh, but I know what you mean. Even when following string quartets with the score, the inner parts failed to "come out" as much as they should. "Insipid" would not be my judgement - if anything it was perhaps slightly too dynamic, which could make setting the initial volume level rather hit-and-miss.

 

[drummerman]

GoldenEars:

"Lack" of midrange may be harsh, but I know what you mean. Even when following string quartets with the score, the inner parts failed to "come out" as much as they should. "Insipid" would not be my judgement - if anything it was perhaps slightly too dynamic, which could make setting the initial volume level rather hit-and-miss.

This brings back memories of the original 8000S I had for a short while. Soundstage was quite extended in width but it seemed to dissect the music instead of presenting it as a whole. The net result was that the brain (mine anyway) had to work to hard to re-assemble it and it became both a little sterile and uninvolving. This is to long ago to accurately re-call everything but I do remember decent bass having been one the strengths of that product. The follow-on amplifier was valve based and it made up for all the short-comming of the Audiolab.

Your comments make me wonder what changes Audiolab have made to the old design.

 

[Frank Harvey]

I was never that keen on the 8000S myself, and preferred the 8000A. From what I remember, this 8200A is much better than the 8000S.

 

[drummerman]

Do you think you could post a 'lid off' picture of one?

 

[Frank Harvey]

Sure - I'll take a pic on Monday and post it up when I get home.

 

[drummerman]

FrankHarveyHiFi:Sure - I'll take a pic on Monday and post it up when I get home.

Thanks David

 

[Anonymous]

GoldenEars:

I bought the new Audiolab 8200CD player recently and was impressed. One thing led to another and I decided that my budget amplifier needed upgrading (after 19 years of flawless continuous service!)

I was fortunate to get a "sale or return" from a dealer and the new amplifier was soon in place. The initial harshness was gone within a couple of days and listening tests could begin. My interests lie mainly with classical, especially string chamber music, although I do Jazz as well. Non-acoustic music doesn't really have any appeal for me - I developed my musical skills either playing the violin myself or listening to others do so on LPs played through a Quad/KEF system. By training I'm a physicist, so I can relate to the technical side as well.

The new setup was very revealing, perhaps a little too revealing in some cases. The bass was well-controlled (no booming) and the mid-band was very clear, if a little cool. Excellent soundstaging through my KEF Q55.2s and Van den Hul "The Second " interconnects. High-ish volumes showed very little sign of hardening or constriction (my only quibble with my old amp). The problem was the top end. It was brighter than I was used to, but even allowing for that, it was just too enthusiastic. This led to very fatiguing extended listening and audible distortion (whether psycho-acoustic or objectively measurable isn't clear). Dynamic passages of string music above about 800Hz had a timbral quality that was just plain nasty! Once noticed, the music became unlistenable to. Even the finest string quartet recordings sounded dire, with listeners working far too hard to make any sense of the unintegrated audio data stream. Even on the good bits, the performers sounded as if they were working far too hard.

Brass and woodwind didn't really present the same issue to my ears, but the problem was also detectable on certain female voices. Piano music showed it clearly, but only if listened for - otherwise it could easily have been mistaken for a performance or recording "feature". When the 8200A was used for TV stereo sound (through standard copper interconnects) the voices sounded superb. It was even quite a good match for my Arcam FMJ tuner - the real issues started when paired with its stablemate, the 8200CD. All testing was done with the Optimal Spectrum filter enabled - the other filters don't cut it on standard CDs (or even quality transfers of historic material). Jazz and other acoustic music (e.g. World) sounded pretty good - with the exception of Jazz violin, of course.

Well-built (although mine had a "sticky" motorised pot.) and sensibly specified. Retains its essential character at low volumes and shares the 8200CD's superb-in-the-hand remote control. Oh well - it's going back. Arcam, here I come (at a price!)

 

[Anonymous]

As a somewhat beginner in the hi-fi world, I'd like to share some thoughts on the 8200a. I've got the following setup: DACMagic, coupled with the 8200a and B&W 685. Before buying it, I've also sampled some other amps, especially a 300 pound Rotel (can't remember the model) and a Roksan Kandy (really hate the looks of this one, not that it would matter that much). I found the 8200 to be slightly more effervescent than the Roksan, with a warmer sound. The Rotel had a sharper sound, more suited for live performances, but it's not really my thing (also, the audio quality was lower compared to the other 2). The 8200 made sound feel like old British hi-fi equipment did, simple, clean, but with an added elasticity and imaging to it (and something else I can't really express in words, let's just say manliness). There are some flaws, however. The back panel has some incredibly cheap plastic - one of the screws broke when I tried to open it, really really bad plastic. However, this makes me feel strangely satisfied, as I'd much rather have the money invested in quality internals, than useless plastic caps. The B&W 685 can't really handle the amp properly, so in a few years I think I'm going to go for the PMC TB2i's.

As a side note, with a digital source, the difference a good DAC makes is huge..

P.S. This mini-review is completely subjective, others might feel/think very differently.

 

[PJPro]

FrankHarveyHiFi:Sure - I'll take a pic on Monday and post it up when I get home.
Did you ever post this lid off picture?

 

[Frank Harvey]

Unfortunately not - I id mention in another thread that the lid is held in place by extremely small star style screws, smaller than we have in store

 

[cstanwhf]

Hi David, you mentioned in another thread that the 8200A is a relly good amp. Does it actually match well with the 8200CDQ? Or the 8200P/M/MB will be better suited? Speakers will be Montior Audio speakers. Thanks.

 

[Frank Harvey]

The 8200CDQ has a built in pre-amplifier, so if you were to go this route, you'd be better off using an 8200P power amplifier, otherwise you'll be purchasing two pre-amp sections. The pre-amp section in the 8200CDQ is touted to be better than that of the 8200Q, so the 8200CDQ and 8200P should be rather a good pairing.

From there, it's just down to how much power/drive you need, and what sort of speakers you're driving. The 8200P will be enough to drive most MA's, it'll then be down to how well you want to drive them - which ones do you have?

 

[cstanwhf]

Hi David. Thanks for the reply.

How would the 8200A working in power amp mode (pre power av mode) compare to the 8200P then? Should be comparable right? I have the 8200A already as I initally wanted the 8200CD to go with it. But in the end, chose the 8200CDQ instead. So have to pair it with the 8200A now. And maybe add the 8200P later to biamp if necessary. Since the 8200CDQ do not have the 12V trigger, the 8200MB is out of the question. And thus, XLR option is out too.

Speakers will be the MA GX100 or GX50. But from previous demo, they are not difficult to drive. So the 8200A working in pre power av mode with the 8200CDQ should be enough power.

Thanks.

 

[Frank Harvey]

You'll find the 8200 working in power amp mode will have a similar sound to the 8200P, but it's not going to have the same current level, or ability to drive or control more awkward speakers.

The good thing about you buying the 8200CDQ is that it will sound better than the 8200CD and 8200Q due to it's extra tweaks. As you have the 8200A, by al means use it in power amp mode, I'm sure you'll find it will drive the MA's satisfactorily. The MA's need a lot of bass control rather than a load of current.

 

[cstanwhf]

Hi David, thanks for the reply.

OK, I guess I will try with the 8200A as pre power av mode first and add the 8200P if needed.

 

[Frank Harvey]

I think you'll be fine.

 

[pete321]

Went to Audio T today to listen to the Rega Brio-R which seems to be getting rave reviews and in some forums, a reputation as a giant killer. Listened with a Rega DAC along with MA RX6 and B&W 684 speakers. I was expecting great things and thought I'd be buying one, but was disappointed. The competition I put it up against was of a higher price, Audiolab 8200a, Cyrus 6 and a Naim Nait XS (no 5i to listen to). With all amps, I quickly took a dislike to the B&W's, just not exciting enough for me. With the RX6's, a bit of Pearl Jam, Nirvana and Radiohead, the Brio-R sounded warm, not particularly articulate and had a flabby bass, albiet quite deep. Changing over to the Audiolab, things became much more controlled, bass deep, tight and rhythmic. A lot more detail to the tracks, but no hint of harshness in the treble as is hinted in the WHF review. Next the Cyrus 6, I expected to like this and did, but not with the rock tracks, it couldn't recreate the deep tight bass of the Audiolab which I found a more enjoyable listen. However, Warwick Avenue by Duffy gave the hairs on the back of the neck feeling I know of old from Cyrus, but it wasn't an all rounder for me. Next the Naim XS, wow, I loved this, not the big soundstage of the Audiolab, but it made the bass which I thought sounded tight on the 8200a sound a bit wobbly! Superb detail, never sounding harsh. It would have been nice to test the 5i against the 8200a. The XS was the winner, but too much for me at the moment. I've ordered the Audiolab 8200a at quite a discount, worked out at £180 more than I could get the Brio-R for. That £180 is buying a hell of a lot more quality to my ears, with no hint of the bright treble suggested in the WHF review, possibly the analogue sounding Rega DAC is a good match for the 8200a.
The MA RX6's certainly impressed as well, not as bright as previous mid-range MA's I've heard in the past. I'll be getting a pair of these in the new year to partner the 8200a.