Budget new amps vs more expensive old amps.

[matthewpiano]

Hi Matthew, did you try the variable loudness knob, witch let the user use more of the volume scale?

Yes, and if you set the volume control slightly above where the big step in its effect is, and use the variable loudness to lower the volume beyond that it is a way round the problem. However, I can hear the effects of the variable loudness, boosting the treble and bass so I'm not keen, and it is a problem that wouldn't exist if the master volume control was executed properly.

 

[ID.]

I dont think the budget marantz PM6005 would compete with the £1000 worth Arcam! Also the Alpha sound was lovely back in the day.

Tough call, but I would get the Arcam quoted for repair. At the end of the day if youre going to replace a £1000 amp with a £300 one, you wont get the same results in my opinon.

I disagree. Electronics in general is so much cheaper these days. Look at colour TVs, modern sets comfortably outperform the old models at a fraction of the cost.

I would go for this. http://www.richersounds.com/product/amplifiers-receivers/yamaha/as201/yama-as201-blk

100w per channel, a MM input and a remote, you can't go wrong.

having heard both I'd take the Alpha 9.

I have to respectfully say that you have no idea what you are talking about. Completely different technology (amp technology is very mature so doesn't have big leaps of improvement) and completely different market scale allowing for economies of scale for TVs that you don't really have for hifi.

The fundmental engineering that made a good amp decades ago will still be pretty much the same that makes a good amp today. My dad had an amp almost as old as I am and it still holds its own.

Medit: apologies, I've heard the AS-301. Normally spec quote is 60 w into 8 ohm. The 100 watt figure is peak with extremely high distortion.

 

[TrevC]

Hi Matthew, did you try the variable loudness knob, witch let the user use more of the volume scale?

Variable loudness is nothing to do with using more of the volume scale, it's a gradual application of more and more bass and treble boost at lower volumes to compensate for the characteristics of the human ear.

 

[TrevC]

The fundmental engineering that made a good amp decades ago will still be pretty much the same that makes a good amp today. My dad had an amp almost as old as I am and it still holds its own.

But we now have superior and far less expensive semiconductors, and amplifiers in general have far lower distortion figures and mucher higher power output. I exclude valve amps, obviously. Why anyone still buys them is a mystery to me.

 

[TrevC]

Hi Matthew, did you try the variable loudness knob, witch let the user use more of the volume scale?

Yes, and if you set the volume control slightly above where the big step in its effect is, and use the variable loudness to lower the volume beyond that it is a way round the problem. However, I can hear the effects of the variable loudness, boosting the treble and bass so I'm not keen, and it is a problem that wouldn't exist if the master volume control was executed properly.

It's supposed to boost the treble and bass. No problem, it can easily be turned off.

 

[TrevC]

Modern stuff easily trumps old stuff in terms of power output for the price, although sound quality will be about the same when used within the amplifiers' power capability. A 100 watt per channel remote controlled Yamaha at £150 is astonishingly good value. As for noticing the difference sound wise I doubt it.

TrevC, can you please enlighten us by telling us what old amps you've compared to what modern amps and what sonic differences there were between them?

I have lost count, really. Many, valve and transistor. I used to repair them for a living but I'm now semi retired. I am currently running a fairly recent Sony budget job TAFE370) in place of my own MFA1 which has the usual volume control fault and I'm fed up with. Does it sound different? Not really. Is it better? Yes. It's more powerful, doesn't cook and has a remote. The best things are that there is almost no background hiss even with the ear next to the tweeter and the motorized analogue volume control has perfect tracking.

 

[TrevC]

I dont think the budget marantz PM6005 would compete with the £1000 worth Arcam! Also the Alpha sound was lovely back in the day.

Tough call, but I would get the Arcam quoted for repair. At the end of the day if youre going to replace a £1000 amp with a £300 one, you wont get the same results in my opinon.

I disagree. Electronics in general is so much cheaper these days. Look at colour TVs, modern sets comfortably outperform the old models at a fraction of the cost.

I would go for this. http://www.richersounds.com/product/amplifiers-receivers/yamaha/as201/yama-as201-blk

100w per channel, a MM input and a remote, you can't go wrong.

Yamaha A-S201

Maximum Power (4 ohms, 1kHz, 0.7% THD, for Europe) 140 W + 140 W

Maximum Power (8 ohms, 1 kHz, 10% THD) 100 W + 100 W

The Arcam referred to is only 70W + 70W. You wouldn't use the Yamaha at clipping levels.

 

[ID.]

I dont think the budget marantz PM6005 would compete with the £1000 worth Arcam! Also the Alpha sound was lovely back in the day.

Tough call, but I would get the Arcam quoted for repair. At the end of the day if youre going to replace a £1000 amp with a £300 one, you wont get the same results in my opinon.

I disagree. Electronics in general is so much cheaper these days. Look at colour TVs, modern sets comfortably outperform the old models at a fraction of the cost.

I would go for this. http://www.richersounds.com/product/amplifiers-receivers/yamaha/as201/yama-as201-blk

100w per channel, a MM input and a remote, you can't go wrong.

Yamaha A-S201

Maximum Power (4 ohms, 1kHz, 0.7% THD, for Europe) 140 W + 140 W

Maximum Power (8 ohms, 1 kHz, 10% THD) 100 W + 100 W

The Arcam referred to is only 70W + 70W. You wouldn't use the Yamaha at clipping levels.

yes, but while the Arcam will pretty much double its wattage into 4 ohms, the Yamaha won't, despite what they try to make it seem like in the essentially uselessness specs quoted. A decent power supply still costs decent money. An entry level amp won't outperform the Alpha 9 and you'd definitely get better value for money repairing it.

 

[TrevC]

I dont think the budget marantz PM6005 would compete with the £1000 worth Arcam! Also the Alpha sound was lovely back in the day.

Tough call, but I would get the Arcam quoted for repair. At the end of the day if youre going to replace a £1000 amp with a £300 one, you wont get the same results in my opinon.

I disagree. Electronics in general is so much cheaper these days. Look at colour TVs, modern sets comfortably outperform the old models at a fraction of the cost.

I would go for this. http://www.richersounds.com/product/amplifiers-receivers/yamaha/as201/yama-as201-blk

100w per channel, a MM input and a remote, you can't go wrong.

Yamaha A-S201

Maximum Power (4 ohms, 1kHz, 0.7% THD, for Europe) 140 W + 140 W

Maximum Power (8 ohms, 1 kHz, 10% THD) 100 W + 100 W

The Arcam referred to is only 70W + 70W. You wouldn't use the Yamaha at clipping levels.

yes, but while the Arcam will pretty much double its wattage into 4 ohms, the Yamaha won't, despite what they try to make it seem like in the essentially uselessness specs quoted. A decent power supply still costs decent money. An entry level amp won't outperform the Alpha 9 and you'd definitely get better value for money repairing it.

I would expect the performance to be very similar. It sounds like the Arcam only needs a squirt of Servisol on the contacts.

 

[ID.]

I dont think the budget marantz PM6005 would compete with the £1000 worth Arcam! Also the Alpha sound was lovely back in the day.

Tough call, but I would get the Arcam quoted for repair. At the end of the day if youre going to replace a £1000 amp with a £300 one, you wont get the same results in my opinon.

I disagree. Electronics in general is so much cheaper these days. Look at colour TVs, modern sets comfortably outperform the old models at a fraction of the cost.

I would go for this. http://www.richersounds.com/product/amplifiers-receivers/yamaha/as201/yama-as201-blk

100w per channel, a MM input and a remote, you can't go wrong.

Yamaha A-S201

Maximum Power (4 ohms, 1kHz, 0.7% THD, for Europe) 140 W + 140 W

Maximum Power (8 ohms, 1 kHz, 10% THD) 100 W + 100 W

The Arcam referred to is only 70W + 70W. You wouldn't use the Yamaha at clipping levels.

yes, but while the Arcam will pretty much double its wattage into 4 ohms, the Yamaha won't, despite what they try to make it seem like in the essentially uselessness specs quoted. A decent power supply still costs decent money. An entry level amp won't outperform the Alpha 9 and you'd definitely get better value for money repairing it.

I would expect the performance to be very similar. It sounds like the Arcam only needs a squirt of Servisol on the contacts.

On what basis? The overinflated way the specs are given? Experience with the current series of Yamahas and the Alpha 9?

The next two levels of Yamaha amps (301 and 501) above that don't match the Arcam either. Once you get above the 501 then it's a much totougher contest.

 

[itsme]

"Variable loudness is nothing to do with using more of the volume scale, it's a gradual application of more and more bass and treble boost at lower volumes to compensate for the characteristics of the human ear. "

I have a Yamaha and i feel that with the variable loudness i can use much more volume, say past 12 o clock.

On page 12 of the user maunal they warn users not to press Amp Direct button when Loudness is used because it increases suddenly the volume.

And a quote of a review: "Even at low levels, the A-S501 manages to convey an impressive level of detail. Its low-level sound is soft and inviting, if a little lacking in bass – but that’s where the variable loudness comes into play. The variable loudness control brings back that low-end power, while allowing you to use more of the A-S501s volume scale."

 

[CnoEvil]

IME Like most things hifi, there are no hard and fast rules.

I think that you can get more SQ for your money with modern amps eg. A&R A60 vs A19, but that doesn't mean that well designed old amps can't wipe the floor with new budget amps eg. My original Linn Kairn/LK100

 

[TrevC]

I dont think the budget marantz PM6005 would compete with the £1000 worth Arcam! Also the Alpha sound was lovely back in the day.

Tough call, but I would get the Arcam quoted for repair. At the end of the day if youre going to replace a £1000 amp with a £300 one, you wont get the same results in my opinon.

I disagree. Electronics in general is so much cheaper these days. Look at colour TVs, modern sets comfortably outperform the old models at a fraction of the cost.

I would go for this. http://www.richersounds.com/product/amplifiers-receivers/yamaha/as201/yama-as201-blk

100w per channel, a MM input and a remote, you can't go wrong.

Yamaha A-S201

Maximum Power (4 ohms, 1kHz, 0.7% THD, for Europe) 140 W + 140 W

Maximum Power (8 ohms, 1 kHz, 10% THD) 100 W + 100 W

I would expect the performance to be very similar.

On what basis?

A lifetime of experience with hundreds of different amplifiers.

 

[matthewpiano]

"Variable loudness is nothing to do with using more of the volume scale, it's a gradual application of more and more bass and treble boost at lower volumes to compensate for the characteristics of the human ear. "

I have a Yamaha and i feel that with the variable loudness i can use much more volume, say past 12 o clock.

On page 12 of the user maunal they warn users not to press Amp Direct button when Loudness is used because it increases suddenly the volume.

And a quote of a review: "Even at low levels, the A-S501 manages to convey an impressive level of detail. Its low-level sound is soft and inviting, if a little lacking in bass – but that’s where the variable loudness comes into play. The variable loudness control brings back that low-end power, while allowing you to use more of the A-S501s volume scale."

The variable loudness control does two things. It trims and overall volume level with a maximum action of -30dB from the level set with the master volume. As you increase the trim effect, the loudness contour also comes into effect boosting the treble and bass. So yes, it does allow you to use more of the master volume control, but it does also affect the overall sound due to the loudness contour and the inability to use direct mode, with the shorter signal paths, at the same time. It isn't a satisfactory resolution to Yamaha's surprisingly rubbish volume control which has a larger jump in effect around the 8 o'clock position than even some of the older Denon DM systems did between 12 and 13. Good amp, marred by a silly ****-up, and overall the older Pioneer A400 is still superior.

 

[ID.]

I dont think the budget marantz PM6005 would compete with the £1000 worth Arcam! Also the Alpha sound was lovely back in the day.

Tough call, but I would get the Arcam quoted for repair. At the end of the day if youre going to replace a £1000 amp with a £300 one, you wont get the same results in my opinon.

I disagree. Electronics in general is so much cheaper these days. Look at colour TVs, modern sets comfortably outperform the old models at a fraction of the cost.

I would go for this. http://www.richersounds.com/product/amplifiers-receivers/yamaha/as201/yama-as201-blk

100w per channel, a MM input and a remote, you can't go wrong.

Yamaha A-S201

Maximum Power (4 ohms, 1kHz, 0.7% THD, for Europe) 140 W + 140 W

Maximum Power (8 ohms, 1 kHz, 10% THD) 100 W + 100 W

I would expect the performance to be very similar.

On what basis?

A lifetime of experience with hundreds of different amplifiers.

Cool. They all sound the same blind anyway.

Not that it's relevant, but what kit do you currently use? Apologies, it's never really registered in my memory when discussed in other threads.

 

[Vladimir]

What I've been told by some very reputable amplifier circuit designers, repair techs and DIY-ers - modern amps are old amps in new cases, with new brochures. TrevC's Sony and ID's Genelec active speakers both use a Sanyo STK module in the power amp section, and that was used in budget Technics amps for at least 30 years now. No innovation and advancement was introduced in mass scale production sinc the 80's. Class D finaly cought up with other topology after 5 decades of struggle, but it's hardly anything new pushing the sonic boundaries.

When you buy a new amp, you buy exactly that, a new amp. Fresh capacitors, clean switches and pots, everything nicely factory set and calibrated. How good it sounds depends how well you chose it for your application and preferences.

The Arcam is hardly a power house, actually very comparable to the other budget amps mentioned in the thread. But it's aging and needs maintanance. You can spend money on that or buy a new amp. I'm with eggontoast with this and I would get the Alpha 9 fixed/cleaned/calibrated by a technician. It's a classic British amp that will soon enter the vintage category and increase its cool factor.

 

[tonky]

What I've been told by some very reputable amplifier circuit designers, repair techs and DIY-ers - modern amps are old amps in new cases, with new brochures. TrevC's Sony and ID's Genelec active speakers both use a Sanyo STK module in the power amp section, and that was used in budget Technics amps for at least 30 years now. No innovation and advancement was introduced in mass scale production sinc the 80's. Class D finaly cought up with other topology after 5 decades of struggle, but it's hardly anything new pushing the sonic boundaries.

When you buy a new amp, you buy exactly that, a new amp. Fresh capacitors, clean switches and pots, everything nicely factory set and calibrated. How good it sounds depends how well you chose it for your application and preferences.

The Arcam is hardly a power house, actually very comparable to the other budget amps mentioned in the thread. But it's aging and needs maintanance. You can spend money on that or buy a new amp. I'm with eggontoast with this and I would get the Alpha 9 fixed/cleaned/calibrated by a technician. It's a classic British amp that will soon enter the vintage category and increase its cool factor.

I agree about class d amps - very clean clear and spacious sound - but (for me) sounds a little too dry, thin and bass light on some recordings - has to be partnered carefully.

tonky

 

[Vladimir]

During most of the technology lifespan it was used for bass amplifiers in subwoofers because they are powerfull, efficient and LF masked their issues in the upper midrange and HF. So it is a bit weird to make a sweeping statment as Class D amps are bass shy. It depends on how they are implemented.

 

[tonky]

During most of the technology lifespan it was used for bass amplifiers in subwoofers because they are powerfull, efficient and LF masked their issues in the upper midrange and HF. So it is a bit weird to make a sweeping statment as Class D amps are bass shy. It depends on how they are implemented.

Yes - it was a bit sweeping - I was relating it to my Cambridge 840a v2 . Not heard any others.

And, as always, it might have been the lack of synergy with my epos es 14 speakers. I did have the CA840A on a weeks trial 7 years ago and liked the clarity, spacious and power but eventually realised I wanted to stream/internet radio etc. I think my newer Naim unitilite suits the epos speakers (great synergy)

tonky

tonky

 

[Vladimir]

Ah. But that amp is 'Class XD', not Class D.

Class XD is a marketing term, not a real topology and it's not Class D but AB. Notice the large dual heatsinks used to cool the transistors.

 

[tonky]

Ah. But that amp is 'Class XD', not Class D.

Class XD is a marketing term, not a real topology and it's not Class D but AB. Notice the large dual heatsinks used to cool the transistors.

XD it is - uses class A at low power transitioning to class B as the power/volume is increased. It does run "very warm". My house "power meter" shows a 300W increase as soon as it's switched on.

tonky

 

[TrevC]

Ah. But that amp is 'Class XD', not Class D.

Class XD is a marketing term, not a real topology and it's not Class D but AB. Notice the large dual heatsinks used to cool the transistors.

XD it is - uses class A at low power transitioning to class B as the power/volume is increased. It does run "very warm". My house "power meter" shows a 300W increase as soon as it's switched on.

tonky

It's class AB with high bias, similar to the MF A1.