Integrated Amp Reviews

Based on the description in the review, it appears that both balanced and unbalanced inputs go through the same or similar circuitry. That is, the "ground" or "neutral" conductor of an unbalanced input signal is applied to the negative or inverting input of the balanced preamp stage. (That's just my interpretation of what I read.)

So, the question the is: Is the Rossini's balanced output just better sounding than the unbalanced, or is it the Yamaha that makes one sound better than the other?

All hard questions to work through, I know. Not a criticism...

"Interestingly, when I repeated this test into 2 ohms, which for logistical reasons I could only do with one channel, the distortion was lower (gray trace) than it had been into 4 ohms with both channels driven (cyan trace)."

Power Supply???

Wilson Alexia2s drop down to minimum EPDRs between 1.2 to 1.9 Ohms (see, Hi-Fi News measurements) ..... They are difficult loads for amplifiers ...... Yamaha A-S3200 may not be providing enough power for their loads .......

JVS could review the new Musical Fidelity M8xi integrated amp ...... M8xi is a EISA award winner and reviewed by Hi-Fi News .........

JVS could also wait till November and review the new Rotel Michi X-5 integrated amp ($7,000) ..... In addition to other built-in capabilities, X-5 also provides 12-band graphic EQ :-) ........

do you encounter an amp that doubles down on power as impedance halves? Not very often from what I've read here over the years. To mention the Yamaha's 4-ohm power spec as though it's a caveat to ownership is a bit unfair considering how often you measure amps that do not even meet their claimed power outputs. Why is this caveat not mentioned in measurements section of pitiful amps like the Sphinx?

Good ones with good current ability, can do > 75% higher. This was lucky to do 50% at 4ohm. And at 2ohm "may" have gone backwards even, if it was put up.

Cheers George

Do you think you're conveying useful information to your readers by using Wilson Audio Alexia2 speakers to test this integrated amp? How many people on this planet know what those $58K speakers sound like?

Why not use a more mainstream speaker for your reviews? Choose a well-known and well-understood speaker for testing, like the KEF LS50, Harbeths, or whatever, so that when you say "warm", more people will know what it means.

stereophileuser2020 makes very good points, and JVS himself raised a lot of questions about the nature and validity of this review. Using speakers that cost about 10 times more than the amp, and comparing an integrated to monoblocks that cost about 5 times more, seems odd. And why not choose a reviewer like Herb Reichert who has on hand a selection of amplifiers and speakers to use for comparison? This amp is not aimed at anyone who can afford the Alexia 2s or the D'Agnostinos. The amp is aimed at people like me who don't have the space for those monstrosities and who, for whatever reason, still actually like to have things like tone and balance controls. (And the implementation of the tone controls, based on JA's measurements, looks excellent.)

back to reviewing midfi,hard times indeed

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.

Maybe HR could elucidate on the eastern mystical partnering of the speaker to amplifier complementariness and the need for more than one plough horse in the barn on a large agricultural research facility.

Thanks for making me laugh Jason. This amp actually needs 1000 hours for proper evaluation. You also need to sacrifice a goat and spin around a baseball bat for 50 turns before you can really get the full effect. Cheers!

HR for followup..... KEF LS50, Falcon LS3/5a, Magneplanar LRS or .7...all should be more appropriate and place less demand on the power supply of the amp. And we will find out how the phono stage sounds. Interesting to read his (contrasting ?) opinion.

"Jason will be reviewing the Musical Fidelity integrated amplifier in the October issue."

If there's any integrated, that has a chance of driving the Alexia's to what their capable of doing it "could" be the Gryphon Diablo 300.
I've heard what the Alexia 2's can do with Parasound Halo JC1's and the Gryphon Antillion was better, this Yamaha didn't stand a chance of getting the best from the Alexia's

Cheers George

I think the reviewer needs to reconsider his fundamental purpose in publishing a component review. To me, a review should inform the reader about the sound of the component and whether it might be of interest to them for their own system. Like many reviewers, he plops the component into a reference system and then tries to judge how close the equipment comes to replicating the replaced component of that system. Comparisons should be fundamental to the review process; a component's sound signature can only really be defined in relation to other components. The problem here is that the implicit comparison, the D’Agostino monoblocks, is not really that illuminating. What every reader interested in the Yamaha would want to know is how the amp compares to components it is competing against in the market and how it might perform in a system similar to that in which it would likely be used. In this case, the Yamaha would never be considered for the kind of system the reviewer has set up, nor was it designed for such a system. Sure, the reviewer may come across another integrated that performs better in his system, but what exactly is that telling the reader? The fact that the Yamaha doesn’t excel at something the designers never really intended it for isn’t particularly revealing.

The reviewer should also adequately explore the features of the component in the ways its intended buyer might. Look at the Yamaha: a ton of money went into the casework, including the fancy feet. Why not review how well the feet were engineered instead of tweaking them with some other product. The balanced inputs have attentuation switches designed just for the problem the reviewer encountered. How well did the Yamaha engineers' solution work? We’re not going to find out from the reviewer. The unit has tone controls; how well do they work? The reviewer does test them but not really to solve a specific tone control problem. I mean compare the lack of useful information in this review to the review of the predecessor model, the s-3000, by Paul Seydor in another publication. Seydor tests and describes the tone controls in a much more informative way. He also doesn’t bloat the review with endless marketing quotes. Why give up so much space to what is essentially ad copy?

Interestingly, both Seydor and this reviewer share a passion for classical music. I listen mostly to classical as well, but even I found the Stereophile reviewer’s musical choices sometimes too obscure to be informative. And I mean, come on, "smoothed-out tonal contrasts that brought to mind the sound of pianos in San Francisco's Herbst Theatre, pre-renovation, especially when they were positioned farther back on the stage.” Even for a die-hard classical music fan, this is an absurd reference to give the reader, pretentious and useless.

had the predecessor to this amp (the A-S3000) independently bench-tested and the results were significantly better. Being that very little if any changes were made to the core amplification circuit or power supply between the 3000 and 3200, one has to wonder if the example Stereophile received is out-of-spec, or if JA's measurements were flawed in some manner (not to imply he didn't strive for accuracy). Unfortunately, AVHub has been acquired and its webpages dissolved, but I know for certain the 3000 they tested posted better numbers. Maybe someone knows of a way to resurrect this page?: http://i.nextmedia.com.au/avhub/australian-hifi_reviews_2013_2013-10_yamaha_as-3000_amplifier_review_test_lores.pdf

I had the same experience once. I participated in the Grand Prix du Montercalo with my Honda Accord ES. I was able to finish, but did not win. And ran out of gasoline many times! I guess this is the decadence. I miss so much the old times.

As mentioned by others, this review fails on every level, and only manages to highlight the pretentiousness that might otherwise be (unfortunately) accepted for genuine high-end component reviews. I’m surprised that it was considered publishable, considering how little value it contributes to both the consumer and manufacturer.

I look forward to HR’s follow-up review, so I can find out how it sounds, how it compares to similar components, how it sounds with appropriate speakers, how it sounds with other ancillary components, how the phono stage sounds, and how the amps features perform. Ie, everything that should have been covered in the primary review.

Very nice unit , anyone familiar with 70’s/80’s yamaha will recognize this is typical Yamaha , a pity such an incomplete review ...

Stick it on a pr of Maggies 3.7 and report ...

:)

Regards

when I read in a review something to the effect that; "...only in comparison to my reference $90,000.00 Ultimo Superbio monoblocks do the sonic deficiencies of this amp become audible" I am reminded that the "high end" never changes. Price determines sound quality.

A review is not meant to, nor ever could be, a complete description of any product under every circumstance.

As a recurring reader, I have the capacity to see how JVS relates to the sounds he hears and how a piece of gear under review compares in the context of his reference.

If you really wanna know where the Yamaha runs into its own limitations, this is a perfect review. The amp falls short of JVS' reference amplifiers/preamp...and he told you in what ways.

Why do people need to demand a review under less revealing circumstances? A less revealing system might gloss over a flaw that might be better discerned on other systems.

How the Yamaha fared compared to the zillion dollar steam punk amps gives us a great 'worst case' scenario for this baby. I'm fine with that.

Follow up in different systems is great and wonderful and useful, but no need to piss on JVS.

JVS even anticipated the antipathy his review has generated. Did he not ask pertinent questions...

"• How can any reviewer make definitive statements about a product after only evaluating it in a reference system that was carefully constructed to reflect their particular sonic preferences?

• How does one take into account fundamental differences between the reviewer's system and a design team's reference when the sum of their respective sources, speakers, cabling, supports, and room has a very different sonic gestalt?

• To what extent is the sound I heard a true representation of what the Yamaha A-S3200 can produce and that its design team strove to create?"

I do admit that bullshit term "high end audio" keeps popping up, which really brings down the hobby, but the term seems to have caught on with the self-congratulatory crowd.

JVS's system is his own that he built, that he enjoys his tunes with but that he also uses as a reference system to compare other equipment. To that end, I think it and JVS accomplished their task by showing me that while the Yamaha is a good amplifier it just falls short of what you get with the uber-expensive reference gear. I do not think this is a put down of the Yamaha amp just that to get that final degree of magic costs.

I think a review should tell you what are the virtues and the flaws of a component, what is and is not good for, not how it sounds in a given system with a value of 100 grands, because that is irrelevant. Like it would be if you do the review with a pair of speakers from your KIA Sorrento and a Barbie CD player.

..comparing products of vastly different price tags; people in here do it all the time as long as they think that the outcome is in favor of their pocket size. Same goes for Alexia's impedance curve; I've seen countless reviews where powerless SETs are being paired with insatiable monsters while the audience applauds it as a comfirmation of their belief that all valves suck. An alternative follow up is always handy but that has nothing to do with this particular review. I have also read other reviews of this amplifier and the descriptions of its sound were very similar to this one save for the fact that the reviewers ultimately liked its character more than JVS seems to do.

It is irrelevant because I already know it is not going to perform as well as a pair of D´Agostino. Use the system you want, but tell me something about the unit, not about how it compares with he best gear in the world. If you use a Formula I circuit to tell me a Honda Accord does not perform as well as a McLaren (especially when the McLaren has been painted in red), that is irrelevant.

Comparing a review sample to a reference component is done all the time. If the review piece is well liked, it will be expressed in favorable terms- e.g. "it gave up just a touch of....to my reference amplifier but held its own....".
Let's face it, this is a less than positive review of the Yamaha and we need more of them to keep us all honest.
Bravo JVS and Stereophile.......

... previously expressed concern regarding the ability of the Yamaha A-S3200 to adequately drive the Wilson Alexia Series 2 speakers used by JVS was prescient.

While this review was not “useless” - as some would suggest - it did serve to highlight that the worst case load presented by the speakers is a significant factor to be taken into consideration when selecting an amplifier.

One might ask how the evaluations of equipment are assigned to the various reviewers?
Do the reviewers have any input into the process, or is that decision entirely in the hands of the editor?
Likewise, do representatives from the manufacturers know who will be reviewing their products and/or can they request that a specific person be assigned to (or excluded from) the evaluation, based upon the components in their reference system?
For example, did Yamaha know in advance that the evaluation of the A-S3200 would be assigned to a reviewer who would be using it with Wilson speakers?

Regarding how much power JVS likely requires, he reported no difficulties when using an $8K Krell K-300i integrated amp. According to Hi-Fi News tests, the peak output of the K-300i is 230W/450W/480W/288W at 8Ω/4Ω/2Ω/1Ω. By comparison, Yamaha’s peak ratings for the A-S3200 are 120W/180W/300W at 8Ω/4Ω/2Ω. JA1’s testing indicates that Yamaha’s ratings are conservative by about 10%, so the actual peak outputs might be closer to 130W/200W/330W at 8Ω/4Ω/2Ω. Perhaps, for the next model update, Chief Sound Designer Susumu Kumazawa should consider raising the supply voltage and adding an extra pair (or two) of power mosfets to the power amp stage in order to double the output power capability.

Besides the ($6.5K) Musical Fidelity M8xi (880W/1740W/1300W/720W at 8Ω/4Ω/2Ω/1Ω), other integrated amps whose output meets or exceeds that of the K-300i, and thus should be able to adequately drive the Alexias with their sub-2Ω EPDR, include the following:
Rotel RA-1592 ($3K): 315W/605W/1110W/1840W
Pass Labs INT-250 ($12K): 325W/605W/755W/400W
Mark Levinson 585(.5)($16K) 355W/635W/988W/1211W
D’Agostino Momentum Integrated ($45K): 345W/635W/1070W/1620W
Hegel H390 ($6K): 279W/544W/1070W/1160W
Hegel H590 ($11K): 325W/640W/1240W/2290W

It’ll be interesting to see the manufacturer’s comment for this review.

I've been an Stereophile subscriber since 1998, and I am letting my subscription run out these days, 22 years later. It has to be me, I know. I've been in audio since I was 14, 52 years ago. I may be tired. Boy, I miss so much the old times. it is me, sorry.

"Some of the sparkling life and joy I expect from this music was replaced by smoothed-out tonal contrasts that brought to mind the sound of pianos in San Francisco's Herbst Theatre, pre-renovation, especially when they were positioned farther back on the stage."

"When I tried the three Ansuz Darkz T2S resonance support feet—the ones that usually support my reference D'Agostino Progression monoblocks ($38,000/pair)—the improvement I heard was consistent with what I hear with the Progressions: a fuller, more fleshed-out midrange and a smoother, rounder sound with heightened depth, air, and detail. The soundstage was also set farther back and seemed more realistic."

Stereophile : "Do I believe that many card-carrying audiophiles will love the sound of the A-S3200 ?, Absolutely.

My questions are :

Does this Reviewer actually believe this ? ( Credibility at stake here )

and

When and where do I get my Audiophile Card?, who has these cards and are they mostly a Yamaha Owners Group located somewhere in the Pacific Northwest ?

Tony in Venice

ps. I've owned hundreds of pieces of HighEnd gear. I've loved and still miss a very small few ( under 10 ).

Please Guys, let's take a timeout here and consider what Jim is saying which, it seems to me, is grounded in the word "preference" or a form of the word thereof. Which do you prefer - coffee or tea? A martini shaken not stirred or a some bourbon - neat or on the rocks? A Corvette or a Jag? Blondes or Brunettes? Switzerland or Spain? Tubes, hybrids, or transistors? Class A, AB, or D? Integrated or separates? Benchmark, Naim, Lamm or _____________. It's simply a matter of preference, and what a grey world we'd live in if life so resticted us to one choice and once choice only - be it a beverage, a car, a soul mate, or even a low, mid, or high end system. Much of the joy can be found in the journey, and we should never become so narrow as to reject other preferences in our individual pursuits of worthwhile goals, which clearly exist outside our own choices and are every bit as valid. Thus, even though I find much of this review to be sorely lacking in a number of important areas, JVS is merely stating a fact that there are, no doubt, a good many music lovers and/or audiolphiles who would find much to like about this Yamaha integrated, and to deny that possibility seems nearly absurd to me as believing that only one way exists to enjoy coffee or tea or .....

I once owned a NAD 3020 Integrated Amp.

It was wonderful, it drove real loudspeakers, it was simple and it sounded very good. ( why did I ever sell it? )

I've represented and sold a rather large range of other integrated Amps that were mostly duds. Blah.

If a person has owned the original NAD 3020 as a Integrated first impression, all integrateds will subsequently seem worthy of consideration. My experience has been that the majority are compromised, Product Line hole fillers.

Loudspeakers & Rooms require a specific Amplification Solution ( Loudspeaker Manufacturers typically know which is the best Amp for their designs ).

Pre-amps give sources a great singing voice.

Engineered Cable Systems make or break, lots of trials, lots of cash spent. Offer to buy them used and resell.

Tony in Venice

"• To what extent is the sound I heard a true representation of what the Yamaha A-S3200 can produce and that its design team strove to create?"

Looks like your speakers and this amp are a mis-match. I'd imagine something with more reasonable current and power demands would be more suitable, not to mention a smaller and less expensive set of speakers would be more in line with the cost and footprint of this specific integrated amp.

Different horses for different courses.

And there I was enjoying my as501 through dali zensor1’s thinking I must be the luckiest guy to be able to enjoy my favourite tunes in such fidelity and came here for a bit of fantasy escapism only to find out so many people with gear 50x the outlay unhappy with what they have or wanting more or less differently. If I was to ever have gear of such magnitude I would definitely need to have it in one of those grand cathedral like spaces you often see gear being advertised in cause I am sure it would be wasted in my regular household room. All that power and glorious attributes for it to be stuck in idle in my mediocre living room. I am sure JVS’s gear would closer approximate a live performance than a lot of other peoples but sometimes you can still enjoy a concert at the local high school or college performance even if they are a little short on scale compared to ones at the Met if we can’t make it there. Thanks to all for the content and the creation of community engagement here at Stereophile. Hope everyone stays well and safe and enjoy the times ahead in this difficult year with the blessings we currently have.

Perhaps 'sphile should publish a disclaimer when reviewing gear no "card carrying audiphile" or 'sphile reader would be caught dead owning. We keep reading comments about the high price of high-end gear, only to read nothing but fecal piling-on comments when you do review a mainstream piece of gear. Some of you should make up your minds.

Me, I'll continue to enjoy whatever reviews are published about gear I'll never hear, let alone see. As a vintage Yamaha fan, this review of modern Yamaha gear is highly relevant to me, and I'm sure others. Don't like a piece of "mid-fi" trash? Don't read the review. Easy.

I am biased. I am a patent attorney and have worked with Yamaha for almost 40 years. I have worked on audio products (amplifiers and D/A converters) but primarily on sound synthesis (keyboards). I have done work with many other electronics companies as well, and even did a patent for James Bongiorno for a class A amplifier circuit in 1980. He definitely was a character as has been noted many times. I majored in electronics because of my hifi hobby in high school, and my hobby became my work. For some context, my current amplification products include a Levinson 526 preamp and bridged Benchmark AHB2 amps, both purchased in no small part due to Stereophile reviews. I have owned numerous Yamaha products through the years, but also many, many products from numerous other companies.

I have been reading Stereophile for as many years as I can remember. I can't recall ever reading a more "bleh" review. I read the review several times, and cannot find a single sentence that actually praises any aspect of the amplifier's performance. Even the tone controls.

Then, I recently received the October issue of Stereophile. To my amazement, the amplifier is listed in Class A. I can only imagine that this was based on additional listening with different related products, by the same or a different reviewer. In any event, it confirms the numerous criticisms of the usefulness of this review.

I feel silly bringing this up but I must assume that the readers here are aware of the fact that the distortion produced by the dynamic drivers inside the wooden box speakers that most are listening to eclipses completely the distortion of the amp that they are listening to. This means, of course, that it is impossible for them to judge the sound quality of an amp based on what they're hearing from their speakers which have, probably, ten times more distortion than any amp.

Your discussion in the "Recommended Components" for 2020 described this amp as "hot running" but JA's measurements don't reflect that, especially when compared to similar products.

useless review. I cannot believe that it was printed. You owe both your readers and Yamaha an apology. Period.

Lots of complaints... with no solution. What are the steps for me to become a reviewer? Pat in Orlando

Match this Yamaha A-S3200 with the new ProAc K3 or K6's and your be in "Audio Heaven" ! ProAc could be my End-Game speakers !

Have just now seen this review and find it, well, interesting. Nonetheless
for nearly the same money, once could purchase a BAT VK3000 integrated, or
a McIntosh integrated (they have a bewildering array thereof) and get a lot
more one's money. I see no reason to even consider this unit.

I did not read all the comments, but it doesn't seem like any of the commenters actually own a Yamaha AS3200. Unlike the article states, I actually am an audiophile who bought the AS3200 for its amp section to use in home theater bypass mode. Yeah that's a waste of the pre-amp section, but for 1/2 off msrp for a new unit, I think I got a deal, given how musical the amp sounds. The amp also sounds more powerful than its stated specs. I especially like how dynamic the bass is. I find the Yamaha to be dead quite, built well, absolutely gorgeous in black, and that it powers my insensitive 4 ohm bookshelf speakers with authority. I never though that I would not feel the need for a subwoofer with twin 4" woofers per speaker. The Yamaha does have a sound signature, but it is so clean and pleasing, I can't help but start tapping my feet with the music. For me, the emotional connection to this amp was instantaneous. I arrived at the Yamaha because all of the multichannel solid state amps I've heard for the same price I paid for the Yamaha suck for music. I was really not expecting much from the Yamaha other than some good looks, but I was wrong; it has substance too. I just wish the line input for the amp section included balanced inputs in addition to single ended because my preamp sounds better with XLR cables. The AS3200 is better than many other high end equipment I've had with big names like Bryston, Golden Tube Audio, Classe, and Proceed. The Yamaha is an heirloom piece I hope to pass down to one of my children. Good job Yamaha!

This must a worst review of any kind on this website. highly incompetent. I wouldn't call Jason incompetent, but its almost crossing the line. Who compares Ferrari with Miata (no offence to Ferrari or Miata), oh well may be there are few who do, but will they get a job of reviewing motors with their attitude, I highly doubt it!