First of all, I have to say I do own a Roksan K3 and it is such a strong machine: It can pretty much play everything if you feed it with a quality source and it is rated probably little more than 70 + 70 watt per channel on 8 ohm like advised. I didn't know Roksan before K3 Whathifi review, and it was a pleasure to discover such a fantastic amp. It does the best with my Tannoy Revolution XT 8F, another great, great bargain.
K3 is also very well priced, over the internet you can get it for even € 1,000 (new) and it is enormous value for money.
So, considering I just got some ATC SCM40 (2013 revision) for another room, I wanted something more powerfull for my new other speakers and I didn't want to spend such enormous money to buy Macintosh or Bryston, so I was looking to get a good, trusted Roksan Blak. This one too can be bought over the Internet for a lot less than the suggested price, so after reading the entusiastic WHF review and after my very good esperience with K3, I bought blind with confidence (considering I also had 14 days to send it back for a total refund.
And here start the wrong part.
According with WHF review, the Blak was tested by them as a 150 Watt (per channel!) on 8 ohm. Here them statement in the review copy and pasted:
"But if you need a fully equipped unit that can connect to your computer, smartphone, turntable and headphones, the Blak makes a mighty strong case for itself.
Particularly when you consider its impressive muscularity - it's rated at 150W per channel into an eight-ohm load, rising to 230W as impedance halves."
This is wrong, according with a Roksan representative I contacted via e-mail to ask why this amp power was pretty much the same of my K3 with the difference the new thing went in protection when volume control was positioned at 65 per cent of the power after one hour of use (with both ATC and Tannoy speakers) and K3 can play as hard and clear as it goes even at 75/80 per cent of his total power. And in this case it just runs hot, never ever too hot, when Blak become hot as hell and simply turns off, one after the other, the two speaker connected to it.
Here the e-mail reply I got from a Roksan representative contacted by me to complain about how poor compared to K3 was my Blak sample:
"Hello Massimo
Firstly, I'm sorry that you are experiencing a problem.
Secondly, K3 power is 140wpc in to 8R and Blak is 150wpc in to 8R.
May I suggest that you contact your local dealer or the distributor for Italy to see if they can be of assistance. If necessary, they in turn can contact us.
Thank you."
For privacy reasons, I wont expose Roksan representative e-mail addresses here, then if WHF representative need more info, I'm here for him in private.
Obviously I reply to the Roksan representative mail asking them to contact WHF to point them about the totally wrong review of Blak; in alternative, if the review wasn't wrong, Roksan sent some special sample to them. I never had a reply from Roksan.
Me, I sent back the Blak and I had a total refund, very disappointed, now the ATC SMC40 runs really good with the same, old, good NAD C375BEE (the one WHF dismissed with a 3 star review and some complains), surely not an esoteric amp, then it does his job pretty well and his sound is like an old Roksan (like the K3) with less steroids.
Just a final note on two days with my Blak: it has nothing to do with K3, musically it is a completely redisagned amp, the sound is like more smooth (less NAD we can say), the onboard DAC is quietly ok, then I didn't need this DAC becouse I can't even heard about a different DAC then Chord DACs,
Thats all, just - please WHF - revise your misleading review.
PS: I also said to Roksan they should clarify better about product specs. On many sites (like for example the italian distributor site) it is rated 150 WATT per channel, in some Roksan own site is rated correctly, in other parts it isn't.
K3 is also very well priced, over the internet you can get it for even € 1,000 (new) and it is enormous value for money.
So, considering I just got some ATC SCM40 (2013 revision) for another room, I wanted something more powerfull for my new other speakers and I didn't want to spend such enormous money to buy Macintosh or Bryston, so I was looking to get a good, trusted Roksan Blak. This one too can be bought over the Internet for a lot less than the suggested price, so after reading the entusiastic WHF review and after my very good esperience with K3, I bought blind with confidence (considering I also had 14 days to send it back for a total refund.
And here start the wrong part.
According with WHF review, the Blak was tested by them as a 150 Watt (per channel!) on 8 ohm. Here them statement in the review copy and pasted:
"But if you need a fully equipped unit that can connect to your computer, smartphone, turntable and headphones, the Blak makes a mighty strong case for itself.
Particularly when you consider its impressive muscularity - it's rated at 150W per channel into an eight-ohm load, rising to 230W as impedance halves."
This is wrong, according with a Roksan representative I contacted via e-mail to ask why this amp power was pretty much the same of my K3 with the difference the new thing went in protection when volume control was positioned at 65 per cent of the power after one hour of use (with both ATC and Tannoy speakers) and K3 can play as hard and clear as it goes even at 75/80 per cent of his total power. And in this case it just runs hot, never ever too hot, when Blak become hot as hell and simply turns off, one after the other, the two speaker connected to it.
Here the e-mail reply I got from a Roksan representative contacted by me to complain about how poor compared to K3 was my Blak sample:
"Hello Massimo
Firstly, I'm sorry that you are experiencing a problem.
Secondly, K3 power is 140wpc in to 8R and Blak is 150wpc in to 8R.
May I suggest that you contact your local dealer or the distributor for Italy to see if they can be of assistance. If necessary, they in turn can contact us.
Thank you."
For privacy reasons, I wont expose Roksan representative e-mail addresses here, then if WHF representative need more info, I'm here for him in private.
Obviously I reply to the Roksan representative mail asking them to contact WHF to point them about the totally wrong review of Blak; in alternative, if the review wasn't wrong, Roksan sent some special sample to them. I never had a reply from Roksan.
Me, I sent back the Blak and I had a total refund, very disappointed, now the ATC SMC40 runs really good with the same, old, good NAD C375BEE (the one WHF dismissed with a 3 star review and some complains), surely not an esoteric amp, then it does his job pretty well and his sound is like an old Roksan (like the K3) with less steroids.
Just a final note on two days with my Blak: it has nothing to do with K3, musically it is a completely redisagned amp, the sound is like more smooth (less NAD we can say), the onboard DAC is quietly ok, then I didn't need this DAC becouse I can't even heard about a different DAC then Chord DACs,
Thats all, just - please WHF - revise your misleading review.
PS: I also said to Roksan they should clarify better about product specs. On many sites (like for example the italian distributor site) it is rated 150 WATT per channel, in some Roksan own site is rated correctly, in other parts it isn't.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram