Dude, look at your posts, all are in the Strictly Audio Note thread or are condemnations of gear other than AN UK. It’s tiring and lame. You and your other fanboy have been driven off other audio forums for the same crap. I hope at least that you’re being paid well.
He did not do a comparison. He merely stated something from memory. He might have referred to his notes, but he neglected to mention that one way or another about a Krell 300i that he did state had been shipped back days before the A-S3200 arrived. Of course lots of reviewers make statements from memory, and I accept that. But I think that because Serinus produced what seems to be regarded as a contentious review it’s important to clarify that a couple of remarks from memory does not really constitute a comparison - not at this level of integrated amp. Nor do his comments in that regard do anything to counterbalance the disastrous closing section of the review.
Oh my goodness I’ve got a lot of audio equipment, from the budget level on up to the dizzyingly expensive. But the equipment I own, borrow, test and play with is just as unimportant as your use of an emoji as an attempt to cover a personal insult. Who owns what and who is rash enough to level pointless insults doesn’t alter the fact that Serinus submitted a very poorly conceived review that Austin subsequently seems to have published without alteration. My original point, which you seem to have lost or missed or ignored or don’t care about, was that Serinus’ review doesn’t commit to anything definitive (in his opinion) about the A-S3200, especially in light of the other fact that he closed the review with a bunch of deprecatory nonsense. It amounted to a useless review. Anybody who has taken care to build a satisfying two-channel audio system at home, whether it’s a budget system or something pricier, is entitled to express an opinion on the usefulness of a review. Your suggestion that I (or anyone else for that matter) who doesn’t regularly use a system similar to Serinus’ is “in the dark” as you put it, is monumentally inappropriate and, in my view, misguided. It suggests that you only value someone’s opinion about audio if he owns very expensive equipment (until you meet or read someone who owns even more expensive equipment). That’s not a value position so much as it is an assertion that more expensive toys are better by definition. Unfortunately, they’re not. I often wonder what some people mean when that make statements that a “system is light years beyond yours...” but I suspect they measure audio purely in terms of dollars spent as opposed to care and attention to musical enjoyment at any budget point. I also wonder what people mean when they talk about one DAC or turntable or what-have-you “blowing [a competing one] out of the water.” It’s senseless and has no useful meaning because it’s a coarse statement that drips of pointless competitiveness and wanting to win some metaphorical my-gear-is-better-than-your-gear contest that nobody but the guy making the statement has actually entered.
He may not have done a direct comparison. However it’s possible that he enjoyed the Krell and couldn’t get the Yamaha gone quickly enough. You don’t need a direct comparison for that.
You could be right, but that’s speculation and yet another thing that Serinus (who wrote the review) didn’t actually write or imply as best I can tell. What was in the actual published review, as opposed to what any of us makes up or assumes, ended in a jumble of indecision. I think it’s an indication that Serinus was not at his best when he submitted the review and Austin didn’t work to make Serinus fix the problem. We also don’t know if Austin allowed the review to go to print because he actually thought it was a reasonable and worthwhile thing to do to leave indecisive discourse in place that served (in mind) to indicate that Serinus didn’t know what to do with an integrated amp that cost far less than the total price of the footers he uses underneath all of his components.
I'm gonna be kicking a dead horse but amazing what one negative review can bring out in people. I took a long hiatus (for me at least) from coming to any audio forums and now I'm beginning to remember why. I got my "end game"preamp McIntosh setup several years ago despite the derision it gets that it's not "audiophile" or for music lovers, just for people who have money that don't know what to buy (not exaggerating here, read many posts over the years stating this) What I found was something I enjoy listening to and thought to myself who cares what tweaks I could do, or some esoteric brand I really should be listening to. Im not gonna say I don't like getting validated by a review saying my purchase was the right one, but in the end it's me who's happy with my system.
What you say is spot on, but even if a jury thinks a case is shut and closed, they still have an obligation to review all the evidence before delivering a verdict. I don’t think he did that.
I admit to having skipped the last 4 pages of this thread (seems like a good thing) ... but just to comment (on the statement by JA): "the fact that it doesn't double its maximum power when the load impedance halves suggests that it shouldn't be used with loudspeakers with impedances that drop much below 4 ohms" when the damn review was done with speakers that drop to 2 ohms and have high phase angles ... well, did the reviewer have any clue the amp isn't designed for 2 ohm speakers? Reading any of Yamaha's specs over the years indicates their amps aren't overbuilt (some might say 'underbuilt') for high current delivery into low impedances. I think a reviewer with integrity would have passed, and/or the editor shouldn't have given it to him (as others have stated). Also as others have stated, the reviewer couldn't use another speaker? it's obvious to even a casual audiophile that this was a crappy pairing in the first place, aside the comparisons to megabuck components. I wouldn't blame Yamaha for pulling all its ads if there are any. PS/Edit: after reading the review, it wasn't THAT bad but was pretty useless ... all the caveats at the end, etc. ... again they shouldn't have let him review the thing or publish it. SO now, someone else takes a crack at it, maybe comparing with like gear, I guess. Woo.
The amplifier can't be a sweet sounding gem if it is being pushed beyond it's limits. The Wilson is in the 1 ohm range. JVS did admit that he would not like Art Dudley's system and vice versa so if we follow through on that preference then perhaps the opposite is true. The "do the opposite" may hold. If JVS likes it and what JVS likes - is opposite to what Art Dudley likes (and what I and many others like) then if he says Yamaha is bad maybe it is good. The power issue is a funny one because one of the most highly regarded Solid State amplifiers is the Sugden A21 (circa 1990 version) and Ken Kessle who reviewed and measured it noted that it was 20 watts at 8 ohms but 13 watts at 4 ohms. It is a Class A topology and in blind level matched sessions panels of people chose this amplifier over far more powerful amplifiers of the class A/B approach. So the Sugden is, to be blunt, gutless compared to pretty much every other SS amplifier on the market at that time. It's also the longest selling integrated amplifier passing 50 years. And in my auditions back in the 1990s it belted more powerful amplifiers like those from Krell and Bryston and Roksan, Arcam, Musical Fidelity, Naim. But it would come in dead last if you tried to drive a Wilson. Now I am not defending Yamaha because looking at the design - it isn't a Sugden but I do take issue with reviewing an amplifier with speakers that are extremely difficult to drive. I did a read-up of a few alternatives in this price range and very few to none amps exactly double from 8 to 4 ohms. They will say 150 watts into 8 ohms and 260 into 4 ohms - that ain't double either. And most of them don't even mention 2 ohms. Look up a few of these sorts of amps - the Bryston B 135-3 is listed at $6700 and is speced at 135W @ 8Ω | 180W @ 4Ω and I do not believe Bryston is 2 ohm stable - they don't list it. ESOTERIC - F-07 Integrated Amplifier $7,500 100 w @ 8 ohm and 170 watt at 4 ohm and they state "Minimum compatible impedance: 4Ω" Luxman L-507uXII is better in the spec sheet wars as their 110W (8Ω), 210W (4Ω) and they look nicer to me and it's $1k cheaper but it's not like the numbers would be so vast here that I would not audition the Yamaha back to back. And again no 2 ohm rating on the Luxman so it's not like the Luxman would perform better on the Wilson - the Yamaha could at least drive the speaker - for all we know the Luxman would shut off in the attempt as "could/maybe" the Esoteric and Bryston. meh I'd buy the Jadis Art Dudley reviewed earlier in the year and save $3,000. But Art wasn't dumb enough to buy Wilson. (albeit Buy is probably not something JVS had to do).
I wasn't disputing his findings, just saying what he sounded like. You can be a competent reviewer yet still sound like a snotty shtinker.
Again - I'm not disagreeing with his review - hell, I haven't heard the unit, so I can't really even have an opinion. I hate his style though, that I will admit to.
Quite a few posts in this thread mention solid state integrated amps that double down from 8 to 4 ohm - in the Yamaha’s price range which other integrated amps do this? I’m sure they’re out there but I’m not aware of any. Of course, those that under-rate at 8 ohms to make it appear they’re doubling down are a whole other story...
Not at all is more like it. But that is kind of the point. At the very least reviewers and audiophiles should use amplifiers that are capable of driving the loudspeaker. I remember reading a review of my Audio Note OTO and the reviewer was using Thiel 3.7s and the OTO is 10 watt maximum output but only 4.2 watts per channel undistorted. So on a speaker like the Thiel the OTO is pretty much going to be in distortion the entire time. Amazingly the reviewer said if he wasn't a reviewer he would buy the amp and be happy but he also had issues with bass - no kidding. I just don't think it is a fair review for Yamaha and these things affect people's livelihoods. First - the speakers are in the one home range which means they probably need very powerful 1 ohm stable amplifiers - Krell or the like. Second - the comparison is mainly to very costly amplifiers and speakers. People who spend 50K plus on esoteric speaker brands are not buying Yamaha. Yamaha is more of a mainstream brand that everyone knows and I think it is a good idea to review such an amplifier with mainstream "everyone knows the name" speaker brands like a Klipsch or KEF or Paradigm or B&W. The number one reason I bought my KEF Speakers was because I felt I could comment on amplifiers or other speakers with a common or well known speaker as my reference. A lot more people have heard properly set up KEF loudspeakers than my Audio Note speakers. In the end I largely ran out of space for speakers and something had to go and so I traded them off. It's also the main reason I didn't buy the Pureaudio One integrated that I reviewed - it's great - one of the best sounding amplifiers I've heard but almost no one else has heard it's expensive enough that it didn't make sense as a back up amp. It would make far more sense as a reviewer to buy a Luxman or Accuphase or more well known SS amp as my reference because my readership have likely heard the amplifier.
Does the person who did the 3200 review get paid by the word? What a horrible review. All i got from that was his ego is bigger that Andrew Robinson (from youtube). If some documentary filmmaker out there, wanted to make a film about reviews in the audio industry, his review would be the trailer. And i remind you that he's at or near the top of his industry. With decades of experience. Its probably a good thing that nobody except us care about audio . If the general population cared for it, then the comedians would rip some of these to shreds.
I use a Yamaha amp to power my Rockport Atrias. Hardly a mainstream speaker, and far more technically advanced than the 2-way monkey coffins with paper (oh wait, hemp!) cones that AN UK charges much more for.
Guys, don't worry about Yamaha. They're an $8.4B company. They'll be fine. And I doubt the corporate bigwigs will hold the review against the engineers/designers behind the amp. After all, it was written by a guy who uses his whistling for healing purposes. jason healing
