2. tech-talk
  3. 1067066163

Stereophile confirms new gear is getting worse....

It appears that "high end" audio gear is moving backwards rather than forwards. If you doubt this, take a look at the November 2003 issue and the test results of the electronics reviewed.

As a case in point, the Pass XA160 mono-block amps that were reviewed perform pretty horribly. While most folks that read these forums know that i'm not shy about being a fan of Nelson Pass' work, i don't have much good to say about these over-priced boat anchors. Most will probably remember what a hard time that i gave the PS Audio HCA-2. In effect, most of the comments that i made about that amp apply to this amp. From what i can tell, the comments that i made about the PS may not be strong enough as compared to how poorly the XA160's performed, especially at the price. Lack of current output, high distortion figures, non-linear frequency responses, the ability for the loudspeaker to modulate the output of the amp, etc... were all evident in the test results. To top it off, the input and output impedances will make this unit quite sensitive to the components ( preamp, speakers, etc...) that it is mated with.

Regardless of who's name is on this unit, how "pretty" it looks ( gorgeous ), what it weighs (200 lbs per monoblock) and the parts quality inside, quite honestly, this unit performed like a really crappy "vintage" ( read that as "low tech" ) tubed unit from the days prior to audio civilization. All this "eye candy" and a sore back for only $18K a pair !!!

As we move to the next product review, we look at the BAT VK-51SE. While this unit was more consistent than the Pass, some of the design choices made are obviously not good ones. The most obvious flaw that i see with this unit is that it changes sound / tonal balance as the volume is varied. Even when the gain control is adjusted for the flattest response, the top end starts sloping off gradually above 5 KHz. As you increase the gain, you now introduce low frequency roll-off into the equation also. If really standing on the throttle, the unit doesn't even make it down to 100 Hz within a -3 dB tolerance window !!! Obviously, this is not very good or linear and is poorer performance than one would expect out of a "reasonable" pair of speakers, NOT line level components !!!

As such, you can't expect consistent sonics from this unit unless you listen at one gain setting. If you have only one source component and all your recordings are of the same intensity, you "might" be able to find a reasonable setting. Since i highly doubt that this is the case, especially the part about consistent volume from recording to recording, you can pretty much count this out.

On top of the variations that this unit produces on its' own, one can introduce a whole new gang of variables into the equation once you start factoring in input / output impedances into the equation. I'll just say that this unit isn't going to be very versatile in terms of what components it mates up with in terms of amp selection. All this "high tech performance" for only $8500. Make that $9000 if you want the convenience of a remote.

Moving a few pages further, we run into the "giant killer" AH! Njoe Tjoeb ( pronounced "new tube" ) 4000 cd player. This is a highly modified / hot-rodded Marantz unit with tubes added, a "super clock" and the option of a "plug & play" upsampling board, fancy footers and an upgraded power cord. Depending on what you want to spend, the base unit is $700. If you go for the unit fully loaded with options, you can feel your bank account drained to the tune of about $1200.

Take one look at the frequency response of this unit and you'll see that it is far from "neutral". To top it off, distortions are higher along with a lack of suppression of AC harmonics. Jitter is pretty high for a unit with a "superclock" i.e. higher than other units i've seen with no "superclock". As such, this unit doesn't appear to be a "killer" of any type other than being able to "flatten your wallet in one swift motion".

Obviously, "high end" has come full circle. That is, it would appear that "audiophiles" are more concerned with asthaetics and reputation than actual performance and fidelity. The folks that used to laugh at Bang & Olufsen are now falling for looks at an even higher price. While the sonics may differ from Bang & Olufsen, the end result is that none of these units are "accurate" or capable of being called "high fidelity" units any more than Bang & Olufsen gear of yester-year was. The fact that B&O are now trying to jump back into "high end" with some truly innovative products just goes to show that one can't judge a company or product by its' cover any more.

Having said that, the above mentioned products can't really be called "Hi-Fi components". What they can be called are "flavoured audiophile toys". The funny thing is that J. Gordon Holt had commented on this type of situation arising within the industry and there are letters in this issue agreeing with that point of view. J. Peter Moncrieff also talked about that in IAR Hotline 76-80 quite a while back and found it rather pathetic. Count me in with that crowd too.

I do have to credit JA and the guys for having the guts to print these test results. While there is plenty of "dancing" in all of the reviews along with more than enough "gushing" ( the Pass review in specific ), it was pretty obvious that JA really DID make mention of the technical problems that each of these products displayed. As usual, Stereophile remains consistent in the fact that they continue to test, measure and display the results for all to see. For this, i offer a very hardy pat on the back, vigorous hand-clapping and whistling. THANK YOU from all of us that like reading and interpreting spec's for ourselves. Having said that, JA still tried to down-play these flaws somewhat by giving the "old soft shoe" at the end of his technical comments.

As i've said before, one has to buy and use what they like and makes them happy. With all of the various and BLATANT "flavouring" that is going on with audio gear nowadays, one really must know what they want and how well components will blend together in their system. It would appear that the days of trying to achieve "accuracy" and "musicality" with with each piece of gear are over. Now audio is kind of like Baskin-Robbins i.e. you've got to know what you like before you order what are VERY specific "flavours" for each product selected.

Let the buyer beware.... Sean
>

PS... I've got my flame repellent armour on along with an oxygen tank and a full battery of weapons. After this post and the responses that i think i'll get, i know that i'll need all of that and maybe more : )
sean
tok20000's avatar
tok20000
608 posts
 
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread......

This link will lead to Pass's explanation reguarding the amps in the Stereophile review.

I cut and pasted Pass's response below.

KF

So here's the final poop on the subject. To sum up:

Stereophile reviewed a pair of XA160 amplifiers that are rated at 160 watts per channel into 8 ohms. In spite of what we consider to be a rave review, they did not meet their full power spec. Unfortunately we did not hear about this until after the review. Although their policy is to inform a manufacturer of such a discrepancy, this didn't happen, so it was a bit of a surprise.

When we received the amplifiers back, we did indeed confirm the wattage shortfall, which was due to maladjustment. This was easily corrected, and the amps do indeed measure 160 watts.

How does does something like this happen? Tracing it back, the "sales department" took the amplifiers home for subjective listening and because they were happy, the amps fell through the cracks with regard to bench testing.

Does this alter the "tone" of the review with regard to the sound? I think only to the extent that they possibly sound a bit better. Then again, maybe not.

Do owners have a reason for concern? Not particularly. First, there could only be a few such units out there at most. Second, such a maladjustment does not have an effect on reliability and only a slight effect on the sound.

A U.S. customer concerned that his XA160's might not meet spec can arrange to have the units examined at the factory and readjusted if necessary without cost, and Pass Labs will pay the freight both ways. This offer will extend indefinitely to XA160's from the first units made to those shipped in September 2003. Just call Peter at (530) 367 3690 for arrangements.

Customers outside of the U.S. would want to contact their local dealer/distributor, but wait a week or so to allow us time to get them the proper information.

We apologize for the mishap. Like any other human endeavor, mistakes happen, but we feel the measure of a company is in its response to the customer, and as always, we do our best to make our customers happy.
sean OP
6,231 posts
 
Bomarc: Please clarify your position so that i and the rest of us may better understand where i went wrong.

Aboldor: Thanks for posting that link. My thoughts on Nelson's response are relatively mixed. While i had no doubt in my mind that they would stand behind their products if their was a problem, i still can't understand how ANY product that costs this much money could go ANYWHERE without a full bench check and QA being performed. At $18K, each unit should come with its' own individualized spec sheet. I guess that i'm expecting too much at this price level though. Sean
>
zaikesman
3,017 posts
 
Onhwy61: That's basically what I've been saying all along regarding the amp itself (read my above posts). My 'complaint' (if you want to call it that - it's not like I would have been buying a pair of these tomorrow anyway, no matter what ;^) has mostly to do with what seems like a somewhat unrealistic and incomplete product *description*, given the amp's not-unexpected limitations in areas we both acknowledge as reasonable for its apparent design brief. I have no trouble, based on what I know so far and the company's history, in believing Fremer's conclusion that it's nonetheless a very fine-sounding product (and could maybe perform even better given optimally-matched speakers). In other words, the amp seems to me like a niche product (within the larger niche of products in its more exclusive price range), despite the image we commonly hold of large, heavy, costly solid-state monoblocks being that they should all drive 2-ohm pigs to arena volumes at 20Hz. I am defending the diverse approach as being fundamentally not silly or worthy of ridicule. I suspect the amp represents an honest engineering effort with good reasons behind it, and let the marketplace decide.
abex
322 posts
 
Sorry not to have read the thread,but to get back to the openning comment.I am seeing that the best quality is coming from specialty independant manfs. or modifiers. I have always held that getting best performance for the $$ is by getting units that can be modded from stock forms. The few designers I have spoken to argee.

These Cos. that are buying up Cos. are really taking things and increasing the bse price while taking quality parts out and subing them for inferior parts or taking the beef out of what was considerd hefy builds.

Harmon has laid waste to a number of good products. Revel,Lexicon and ML are suffering from inferior parts and quality issues from what I have been reading from the opinions of others.

Klipsch bought Aragon is taking good amps and downsizing the PS while saying they are increasing the quality.

On the uoside Digital amps might well be a good thing for audio. It might brig SOTA performance into the home without the need for outragous prices. That might take time,but I have heard good things from Panasonics new amps. I am not an admirer of Intergrateds or Recievers or the Japanese all in one market,but if what I am reading is true then it just might be a new revolution in Recievers that is coming,if they can oversome the trait of interference that has always plagued recievers.

I have not read the Pass review yet,but I did read N.Pass's response to it at DIY.com. Seems the unit was taken home then not rechecked by their lab before being sent out. He has taken steps to correct the mishap from happening again and will honor any unit to be checked out to verify it being OK. I would not like to spend that type of $$ for a prodt. that moght not be good.

Just a few observations.
aboldor
49 posts
 
What I had in mind when posting the link was that some response is better than no response at all. No, the post does not address all the problems. Yes, I definitely agree that the amps should be thoroughly checked before delivery, and as I said, at these prices, there should be no room for excuses. Anyway, apparently it's not the first time when a Pass amp's factory settings are out of whack. (see David Smith's review here). But no matter how hard anyone tries, mishaps will happen. So I say - let's give them the benefit of the doubt... for now. Let's see how - and how eficiently - they will address the QC problems.
More to discover