Is weight really mater?


If both amps are rated at 100wpc, in general, would one weight 100 lbs sounds fuller, more textures and juice, and is a “better” amp than the one weights only at 8 lbs? (Nope, I’m not comparing commercial PAs or Karaoke mixer systems.)
Mark Levinson No. 331 is weighted around 100 lbs while the amazing Jeff Rowland Model 102 is weighted shockingly at 7.4 lbs. Yup, you read right, “seven point four pounds”.
Can I use this factor for my determination?
In real life, bigger men will tend to lift bigger weights than tinny men, but how about electronic amplifications? Shouldn’t they too need bigger toroid transformer, bigger caps, bigger heat sinks, etc? What’s with the 8 lbs?
Please simplify much possible your comments so others (and I) would understand.
Speakers are smalll 6-ohm floorstanding Sonus Faber Grand Piano Home series. Thanks all.
128x128nasaman
Rayooo,
Yes, yes and yes; you are correct. I just now realize that I'm not really comparing apple to apple here. Now I'm torned with another selection, class D or class A?
In class A or class A/B the weight corresponded mostly to the size of the power supply transformer, where bigger is usually better at any output rating, particularly for bass. However, in all things audio, there are more exceptions than rules.

Class D, or switching amps, like the JR 102, are much more efficient for the amount of power consumed and don't require such massive transformers.

I'm an old-timer and still prefer the heavyweights.
>>Now I'm torned with another selection, class D or class A?<<

Haha, Yes, I would be as well!

My suggestion would be, unless you have specific requirements like being more "green", or space restrictions etc. I'd stick with a good old A/AB aka Meat and Potatoes Amp that sounds right to you! Good luck!

Post removed 
John, in general the answer is no, weight is not a factor in amplifier performance. High performance can be achieved in amplifiers that weigh a lot, and in amplifiers that weigh relatively little. In dividual designers make certain technological choices that end up leading down particular technologies, topologies. . . and weights. In the end, there are excellent amplifiers at all weights, and horrible amplifiers at all weights.
In the particular case of the JRDG 102, the designer wanted to achieve a high degree of performance for a chosen constraint. . . it was not weight. . . but an entry level target price of $1500. He used class D amplification and regulated switch mode power supplies that are extremely energy efficient, hence the very low weight. Whether Rowland achieved his price/performance goal on this particular product or not can be decided only by using one's ears. Unfortunately a scale won't help.
Will JRDG 102 outperform a Levinson 331? Perhaps possibly, but I truly doubt it. The 331 was designed with more ambitious goals. and it is priced 3 times higher than JRDG 102. While price alone is not a particularly good gage of performance, it is somewhat a better indication than weight.

On the other hand, if your budget can go as high as the $2K for the 331 currently offered on Audiogon, I suggest you also have a look at some of the bel canto Ref 1000 monoblocks available on Agon. I have reviewed one of these little wonders. . . and they are quite wonderful. . . and yes, very powerful as well. .. . and won't turn your living room into an oven. . . 331 runs in class A, which means it dissipates a huge amount of heat. . . not great for Houston Summers. G.