It is not that it was a negative review that actually makes a change. The problem is that the negativity was by comparing a 7.5 k integrated to a 60k pre power.
I teach writing (or at least try to), so maybe I'm inclined to take an excessively charitable view of what happened here. What I see is the kind of mistake writers blunder into when they try re-edit what they wrote the first time, but try to make the repair by taking a shortcut. It never works. I know, because I've made the mistake myself more times than I care to admit. I am inclined to think that Serinus seriously disliked this amp in absolute terms, all comparisons aside, and wrote it that way the first time. But when he re-read what he had written, he decided, probably for "political" reasons, he needed to take some of the harsh edges off. Unfortunately for him, he turned a simple "I do NOT like this amp" -- which frankly, is the basis for a pretty good essay -- into a weak and arguably meaningless comparison. Writers face such problems with audience reaction all the time., and in fact, good writing is the art of solving such problems without sacrificing the integrity of your position. If he disliked the amp as much as I think he did he should have said just that, plain and simple -- with an obligatory YMMV. He would have saved himself a ton of criticism, and avoided the rather sophomoric colloquy about audio reviewing at the end of the article. YMMV
Magnepans don’t really challenge my A-S1100 so I doubt the 3200 would struggle with them. The test results actually suggest the amp is stable into 2 ohm loads and Yamaha does provide a 2 ohm rating in the manual. It didn’t go into “protection” mode unlike many of the amps he tests.
having owned the 2100 (not as good as this or course) but i can indeed confirm these amps are an absolute boring listen at best. JVS review is spot on.
The amp should have shortcomings comparing it to something that costs 8 times as much. But as a reviewer you should be able to take the cost of the item into consideration.
Where are you guys coming up with this idea that it can’t drive four ohm loads? It exceeded its 4 ohm spec in the tests. Many amps they test fail to meet the their 4 ohm spec. Yamaha claims the 3200 can push 300 watts/ch into momentary 2 ohm loads.
If he doesn't like it, he doesn't like it and that's fine and that's what he should have said. But for me, as soon as he hooked it into that system, the review was over. There is absolutely no information that the shopper for a sub $10k Integrated can gather from that review, IMO. His cables alone cost multiples of the Yamaha. It was just a silly choice to have him do it. TBH, now I want to ask my local if he can get me one to test drive.
For those dogging on the 3200 for an alleged lack of grunt, you might go have a listen to one. The low-octave bass they can produce embarrasses most amps. Even my $300 A-S500 smokes amps like the Rogue Pharaoh when it comes to bass authority.
Listen, no offense intended to anyone who purchased a Yamaha. We each buy and choose what we like. BUT...with this product Yamaha is trying to run with other high end manufacturers like Luxman, Hegel, McIntosh, et al and the gear should perform like it at this and similar price ranges. I also understand the concept of confirmation bias where we tend to convince ourselves that our purchase is better than it may be. Also, the Rogue Pharaoh isn't the benchmark at its pricepoint either.
And many products at comparable prices don't perform any better on the test bench. I recall John Atkinson noting in one of the Hegel reviews that the amp had inadequate heat-sinking. One reviewer on Youtube ended up preferring the A-S1100 to a pricier Luxman. I've heard my share of Mac gear and I'd take the Yamaha over most of it.
Here is what I posted in the comments section for this review: "This review was doomed from inception. Who uses a $7k integrated amp with $53k speakers ? Who uses a 150wpc integrated amp that fails to double output into 4ohms, and is not rated for 2ohms, with speakers that demand plenty of current into a sub 4ohm load ? For many purchasers, this will be a one box solution for a main system. To fail to review the phono section is irresponsible. Competing amps at this price point (McIntosh, Luxman and others) point to the quality of their phono stages as reasons to purchase. This piece deserves a followup review by someone who can use this amp in the proper context."
I don't see the part of the review where he unfavorably compares the Yamaha to the other units you mentioned (one of which I own).. I only see the part where he puts a $7500 Integrated Amplifier into a system whose cables cost several multiples of that. And hooks it up to speakers that no-one buying an Integrated Amp would ever use. It's stupid from start to finish.
The A-S500 is a killer value, I agree. Just curious, why do you mention the Rogue Pharoh in this context?
Have you actually heard this Yamaha amp? If you have and didn't like it, that's fine. If you haven't, I don't see the validity of dogging it compared to the other brands you mentioned. Yes, Yamaha has a very deep history over the last 20 years of catering to the low and mid-fi market. But that doesn't disqualify them from producing higher caliber gear. Yamaha is a very large company with massive resources and significant talent that have been capable of putting out excellent products across a wide range of audio categories for over a hundred years. They're still quite capable of offering good hi-fi products in addition to catering to the lower ends of the market.
I just used the Pharaoh as a comparison point because I owned one for a time. The Rogue is touted as a powerhouse but in practice its bass, even with efficient speakers, is a joke for a $3500 amp. The 85 watt/ch A-S500 sounded more authoritative in every regard. It's proof that power specs can be very misleading.
Interesting... I have not heard the Pharaoh. I tend to be suspicious of Class D amps, but at 38 lbs, I thought this guy would have some grunt, on the assumption that they put those 38 lbs to good use.
reviews that compare to much more expensive components are done all the time. if the reviewer likes the product, he will mention how close it came to the sound of the high priced piece. that didn't happen this time.....
highly tube and supporting system dependant. i like the mainstream yamaha amps, a lot. but the pharoah had immense bass every time i heard it.
I tried 3 different pairs of tubes in both the Sphinx and Pharaoh, both could not keep up with the A-S500 in any case.
stereophile often contradicts themselves like this. i tend to believe the worst conclusion but could be wrong. the big point to me is since this amp is not competetive price vs power, what does it offer for your money? it doesn't seem like it is a sweet sounding gem of an amp that would distinguish itself either. is it big box and meters bling? no thanks.
There are plenty of highly-rated, highly-regarded components that require careful system matching to perform at their best. That's to be expected and is one of the most important decisions we make when assembling our systems. The fact that this reviewer simply inserted the Yamaha into his system without any regard to the suitability of the other components and, when he was less than pleased with the results, did not try any other combination of components, I believe, makes this review profoundly unhelpful. Anybody considering this amp will want to know what it type of speaker it works well with and what type it doesn't. Speakers that are likely choices for this amplifier.