Did anyone purchase the Benchmark brand speaker cables with the special connector? I believe the cables are Canare star quads and are quite reasonable. I'm using star quads i purchased off ebay and they are fine speaker cables.
Benchmark AHB2 amplifier - what to expect?
My current amplifier, driven by Benchmark DAC3 HGC, is Rowland model 102. It is basically couple of Icepower 200ASC modules packed into resonance free heavy case, with additional input differential amp THAT1200. These modules were used in many small class D amps, including Bel Canto S300 and M300. I feel that Benchmark AHB2 might be a good choice for few reasons:
- It matches my Benchmark DAC3 (electrically and physically)
- It has neutral sound, that I like, with very low noise floor (according to reviews)
- It could possibly extend trebles a little more (trebles are slightly veiled now).
My speakers are Hyperion Sound HPS-938, (a giant killer), but not too many people are familiar with them since company went bankrupt few years ago. They tend to sound warm (soft dome tweeter), with wonderful midrange.
I'm looking for anyone familiar with AHB2 and class D amps. I found favorable review of AHB2 vs NAD M22, but it might not apply to my situation since M22 is based on different modules (Hypex). My birthday is coming in a month and I could buy myself a present. I will be grateful for any comments.
- It matches my Benchmark DAC3 (electrically and physically)
- It has neutral sound, that I like, with very low noise floor (according to reviews)
- It could possibly extend trebles a little more (trebles are slightly veiled now).
My speakers are Hyperion Sound HPS-938, (a giant killer), but not too many people are familiar with them since company went bankrupt few years ago. They tend to sound warm (soft dome tweeter), with wonderful midrange.
I'm looking for anyone familiar with AHB2 and class D amps. I found favorable review of AHB2 vs NAD M22, but it might not apply to my situation since M22 is based on different modules (Hypex). My birthday is coming in a month and I could buy myself a present. I will be grateful for any comments.
- ...
- 53 posts total
Randy, you mean my clumsy attempt to write review? Yes it was in comparison to Rowland 102, but it is likely not very useful, since Rowland 102 is based on old, first generation of Icepower modules. I can only say that AHB2 sounds wonderful to me and it is getting better in all respects every day, but again it means nothing taking into consideration my limited experience. Rowland was a good amp (I keep it for the second system), but AHB2 is outstanding. I found interesting discussion on Audioasylum : http://https//www.audioasylum.com/messages/amp/205426/review-benchmark-ahb2-with-avantgarde-speakers-what-a-disappointment OP calls AHB2 a big disappointment in comparison to his SET amp, while in follow up discussion another person has completely different view. At one point John Siau, a lead engineer at Benchmark, explains why opinions can be so different. I solved the problem with my remote. Receiving diode in DAC3 had one pin poorly soldered. This pin connects to ground plane that sinks a lot of heat. It looked like soldered by somebody who doesn’t have any experience (or is blind). I fixed it to avoid shipping it back and forth, but I would expect better from Benchmark. The problem is that almost everything else is SMT - a well controlled process, but hand soldering depends on the skill of a person. RCA was famous for cold solder joints in their TVs (I had one with two cold joints), because it was most likely assembled by cheap unskilled labor. |
I appears that link above doesn't work, not to mention very long discussion. Let me show quotes from original post and two responses. OP: I don't pretend to be a professional reviewer (in fact this is the first time I've been moved to review any equipment), so can't explain exactly the differences, but it was akin to listening to a live acoustic performance versus listening to music through loudspeakers. The difference was not slight - it was dramatic. There is no "tingle factor" and no goose-bumps when listening with the Benchmark. If anyone says that the Benchmark is more accurate - frankly I don't care - I listen to music with my ears, not an oscilloscope! It was dull and lifeless by comparison. If you listen to live music there's inevitably background noise (you're sharing the auditorium with other people) and the acoustics are possibly not as good as a recording studio, but despite all the drawbacks, live music is so much more exciting to listen to. Similarly with the valve amps, an evening listening to music is thoroughly enjoyable. With the Benchmark it was little better than loud background music. Furthermore, the inclination was to turn down the volume of the Benchmark and turn up the SETs - inaccuracies, slight background noise and all! Music should be a thrilling experience and the Benchmark sadly doesn't offer thrills. Response1 (John Siau): Peter,Response 2: My experience with the Benchmark AHB2 driving sensitive speakers is somewhat different. In my current setup with Benchmark DAC2 HGC/AHB2, I am driving a pair of Klipschorns with a 105 dB sensitivity so in that sense they would be comparable to the Avantgarde speakers. |
I would like to add to the discussion regarding the strong reactions to the AHB2 and other amps. I find that audiophiles (but never reviewers! LOL) present strong, hyperbolic statements in regards to components or systems that represent emotional reactions, rather than absolute conclusions to the value/sound of the gear. Readers should realize that and not react overly to someone's strong description, as it may not reflect the experience of every user. There is such a huge variance in listener preferences that one is bound to encounter strong negative and positive reactions to any given product. John Siau is cordial and correct in his analysis; the Benchmark products would be categorized imo more as "studio sound" rather than smoke-filled club sound. They do not editorialize, but neither did I find them to assault the ears. Many audiophiles seek what is imo a dullish, bloated, euphonic, but distorted sound and they consider that "real". Well, that depends on how much accuracy you want and how much tonal coloration/warmth. Of course, that varies with listener and system. Anyway, in my testing in the review I agree that the Benchmark products are neutral in a good way, not sterile. Are there more warm sounding components? Of course. But, often you have an expense associated with obtaining that warmth. I do not wish to give up either extreme definition or tonal richness, and obtaining both can be like balancing on a razor's edge. Finally�, don't forget, the speaker system has an overwhelming impact on the final result. It's not terribly convincing to declare a component warm, thin, tube-like or not, based on a listen with one speaker system. One may say, "... in my rig it sounded..." and be accurate, but this in no way captures the span of results possible. Try a product with dynamic, ESL and high efficiency speakers, a few amps and cables, then conclude. Most cannot, so any declaration based on one setup should be taken with a caveat, spoken or not. |
- 53 posts total