Yamaha A-S1100 or Atoll IN 200 Signature?

Hey all!

Im Im wonder which to get - and I've no way of testing them, just order them.

Right now I've got a pair of Triangle Genese Quartet paired to a Yamaha R-N803d stereo receiver.

I gotta be honest and say I'm perfectly fine with my setup, even though the amp us 1/4 the price of the speakers and people frown upon streamers, it pushes my speakers perfectly.

However, I'm inclined to upgrade it. I'm planning to hook up a Yamaha WXC 50 STREAMER to whichever amp im getting since I love musiccast and mostly listen to tidal hifi.

I would assume the yamaha 1100 is great since I already like the yamaha soound on account of my 803, and im not interested in getting the 2100 since its its basically the 1100 with a much improved phono stage with MC/MM switch (gave up on vinyl a while back) and separate dedicated headphone amp (again, not interested in this feature either) so 1100 suits me just fine, theoretically.

But the Atoll looks really nice, is at the same price, has similar features but slightly more power, and has gotten me intrigued.

Anyone tried out the Atoll? The yamaha? Any thoughts?

 

Keep the 803 and spend your money for something else. I don‘t think any amp will sound that much different or even better than the 803.

 

I'll be honest, I've never heard more expensive amps on different speakers. I have heard cheaper ones on very similar speakers - the Yamaha WXA-50 - basically a 60-70WPC Class D mini amp on the Triangle Signature Delta (which is basically IDENTICAL with the Quartet Genese, excpet the colors are a bit different and it's assembled in France as opposed to China) and it sounded the same as the 801 (which is basically the same amp stage as the 803).

But I've heard SO MANY PEOPLE telling me that a better amp, such as a 1100/2100/etc would VASTLY improve my speakers. Problem is i have no way to test one out on my speakers, in my listening room.

Why do you think that a 1100/2100 wouldn't sound better than the 803d? We're talking about dedicated amps (not streamers), slightly better power, lower THD, higher dampening, and judging by the specs, better materials inside and in the connections out back.

 

I upgraded from a A-S701 to the A-S1100 and honestly I don't hear any improvement soundwise when I listen to digital scources. The phono section however is much, much better, but since you only listen to digital sources I would invest into something different. In your opening post you wrote that you are perfectly happy with your current set up, so why upgrade and spend money for something that will probably not improve your listening pleasure. Forget about the price difference between your receiver and your speakers and enjoy your system.

 

You're most likely right. I'm indeed happy with the receiver - and even more happy with the Speakers which are a very recent purchase so I was wondering how to make them sound better, thus the thoughts about changing the amp.

However, since the amp is good, and there's no point dashing out money to get another one, is there any improvement I can do? Maybe if I get an external DAC/Streamer, will there be a significant improvement, since the 803 will be working only as an AMP and thus not generate as much noise/jitter on the inside? Was thinking of hooking a Yamaha WXC-50 to it - to work as separate pre-amp/dac/streamer.

 

The 1100 produces a sweeter midrange and greater bass extension than the bi-polar based amps like the 801. Instrument and channel separation are also superior, which results in a larger soundstage. How noticable the differences are will largely depend on speaker resolution and setup. If your speakers are crammed against the walls, you're not as likely to notice the improvement.

 

What does "sweeter" midrange mean? And what's a "bi-polar" based amp?

 

The midrange is tube-like - holographic.

The 801/803 are based on bi-polar transistors. The 1100 is a MOSFET amp.

 

Another nice feature of the 1100 is it allows an upgrade path by pairing the amp section with an external preamp, through the "main-in" inputs. This results in a fairly big improvement.

 

I've never heard the Yamaha amp, but one of my favorite setups at this year's AXPONA was the Atoll/Atohm room. While there, I listened to the Atoll IN200 driving a pair of floorstanding Atohm speakers. Just a beautiful sound.

 

Alright, thanks!

I see the 2100 is also nice, but the difference is the headphone amp and better phono. Is there any other difference in the amp part?

 

Atoll amps are all MOSFET based as well.

 

The 2100 has a bit more power capacitance so can better handle dynamic swings at high SPLs, in theory. The 1100 still has almost twice as much capacitance as is typically found in $2500 integrateds. Also has a lower noise floor than most due to floating the ground.

 

Question for Yamaha AS1100 owners: how is the midrange, particularly voices, presented? In line with the rest of instruments or in front of the whole picture?

Does it give a rich voice delivery or is it soft (and sweet as described above)?

Thanks!

 

5th-row presentation. Typically they are either in-plane with other instruments or slightly behind, depending on recording.

Not sure how soft and sweet is different from "rich," which is a completely subjective trait. Vocals are about as good as you're likely to find from any push-pull tube amp. These amps aren't as smooth as the typical class-A amplifier, however they sound more realistic. Think about it, when was the last time you heard live music that sounds anything like the liquid smooth sound of class-A? Live music doesn't sound that way.

 

My feeling at the time was that the A-S1100 was a very rich, organic sounding amp with huge bass control, and not at all mid forward. Very enjoyable but not one of those amps that makes things like vocals really pop out in front of the soundfield.

 

What speakers do you use?

 

Yamaha NS690II. I have to admit though, that I am by no means an audiophile listener, I mostly listen to music from the 1950s and 60s.

 

Well still, 60s had some pretty good recordings. You're sayin there's no difference between the 700 and 1100?

 

Between the 701 and the 1100? At first I didn't hear much of a difference between the two. Maybe a wider and deeper soundstage, but that's about it. I did not do a A/B comparison between the two. The 1100 looks gorgeous of course and I admit that I was mainly attracted to upgrade from the 701 because of the design of the 1100.

 

I'm doing a long term demo of the Atoll 50 integrated amp.
It's sonic value is very close to my $5000 tube amp.
I'm either going to keep it or order the 100.
Needles to say I like it very much and place it as one of the best bargains I've come across in the last few decades.

 

I would hope the upper-end Atolls don't come with that terrible orange-peel finish.

 

I expected that kind of response from a Yamaha guy.
Ever think about judging audio gear with your ears ?

 

Wait, I'm demoing the little 50 , no orange peel here.

 

I do judge with my ears, that's why I chose Yamaha over many others. The meters are just icing on the cake. Would it surprise you that Yamaha can afford to employ talented engineers, and produce a product that benefits from economy of scale?

This one sure has it: