I measured Peachtree Audio's nova300 with my Audio Precision SYS2722 system (see the January 2008 "As We See It"). Before performing any tests, I ran it at 80Wpc into 8 ohms for an hour. At the end of that time, the vents on its top panel were warmer than I'd anticipated for an amplifier with a class-D output, at 92.3°F (33.5°C), though this is cooler than would be expected for an amplifier with a conventional output stage. Because of it uses ICEpower class-D modules, all measurements of the nova300 were taken using Audio Precision's auxiliary AUX-0025 passive low-pass filter, which eliminates noise above 200kHz that might otherwise overload the SYS2722's input circuitry. Without the filter, there was almost 1V of ultrasonic noise present at the Peachtree's output, with a center frequency of 472kHz.
Looking first at the nova300 via its line-level (Aux 1) input, the maximum gain was a moderate 33.3dB at the speaker terminals, 14.9dB at the preamplifier output, and 5.9dB at the headphone output. All three outputs preserved absolute polarity (ie, were non-inverting). The input impedance was 10k ohms at all audio frequencies. The output impedance from the headphone jack was very low, at 2.1 ohms, which will be appropriate for low-impedance cans. The impedance from the preamplifier output was a low 100 ohms, again constant across the audioband. The speaker output impedance was very low, at 20Hz and 1kHz at 0.086 ohm—but, very unusually, became negative at 20kHz; that is, a drop in load impedance resulted in a rise in output. I assume that this was due to the action of the necessary low-pass filter that removes most of the class-D stage's switching noise.
Fig.1 shows that while the response into 8 ohms (blue and red traces) is down by 0.5dB at 20kHz, into 2 ohms (green) the output is flat to 30kHz. And because of the low output impedance at low and middle frequencies, the modulation of the amplifier's response by the impedance of our standard simulated loudspeaker is negligible (gray). However, because of the low-pass filter before the speaker terminals, all the responses roll off sharply above 50kHz, which slows the rise of the waveform's leading edges with a 10kHz squarewave (fig.2). Two cycles of well-damped ringing can also be seen in this graph. The response from the headphone jack was flat to well above 100kHz.
The Peachtree's channel separation via its Aux 1 input was very good, at >90dB in both directions below 1kHz, though it worsened slightly at 20kHz, to 70dB L–R and 78dB R–L. With the auxiliary Audio Precision filter in circuit, the unweighted, wideband signal/noise ratio was okay, at 66.5dB. This improved to 84dB when the measurement was restricted to the audioband, and to 87.5dB when A-weighted. Though there are some supply-related spuriae present in the nova300's output, these are very low in level (fig.3).
The Peachtree comfortably exceeded its specified maximum output powers of 300W into 8 ohms (24.8dBW) and 450W into 4 ohms (23.5dBW), clipping (defined as 1% THD+noise), with both channels driven, at 350Wpc into 8 ohms (25.4dBW, fig.4) and 500Wpc into 4 ohms (24dBW, fig.5). At very high powers, however, the nova300 loudly buzzed and hummed. The THD+N was very low at low and middle frequencies into both 8 and 4 ohms (fig.6, blue, red, cyan, and magenta traces), but rose significantly in the top octave and into 2 ohms (gray). Fortunately, the distortion signature was heavily second-harmonic in nature (fig.7) and low in level, even at high powers (fig.8). High-frequency intermodulation was also very low (fig.9).
I had thought about measuring the nova300's phono input (Aux 2) at the preamplifier outputs, but as the speaker outputs are still active, that's where I examined its behavior, making sure the volume control was set to a level where the amplifier was not being overloaded. With the volume control set to its maximum, the overall gain was 70.8dB, which is appropriate for a moving-magnet cartridge. The input impedance was an MM-compatible 49k ohms at 20Hz and 1kHz, dropping slightly to 42k ohms at 20kHz. The RIAA-equalized response (fig.10) showed some mild boost in the midrange, and the output rolled off above the audioband due to the low-pass filter mentioned above.
Channel separation was good, at 60–75dB across the audioband, and the MM input was quiet: the unweighted wideband S/N ratio, ref. 1kHz at 5mV and measured with the inputs shorted but the volume control wide open, was 76dB (average of both channels), this improving to 84.4dB when A-weighted. Distortion was also low via the phono input, the third harmonic being the highest in level with a 1kHz tone at 5mV (fig.11), as was intermodulation distortion (fig.12). Overload margins were good, at 18dB across the audioband.
Turning to the nova300's digital inputs and the Audio Precision's digital outputs, I used WAV and AIFF test-tone files sourced via USB from my MacBook Pro running on battery power with Pure Music 3.0. Apple's USB Prober utility identified the amplifier as "Peachtree nova300" from "Peachtree Audio" with the serial number "161020042." The USB port operated in the optimal isochronous asynchronous mode. Apple's AudioMIDI utility revealed that, via USB, the nova300 set to USB 2.0 accepted 16- and 24-bit integer data sampled at all rates from 44.1 to 384kHz. The S/PDIF inputs, including TosLink, accepted data sampled up to 192kHz.
With a 1kHz tone at –20dBFS and the volume control set to its maximum, the output level measured at the speaker terminals was 23.1V into 8 ohms, equivalent to 66.7W, which suggests that the digital inputs are more sensitive than they need to be. As I had for the phono input, other than for the low-level signal tests I set the volume control to avoid overloading the output stage for the digital tests.
The impulse response with 44.1kHz-sampled data (fig.13) revealed the nova300's digital reconstruction filter to be a conventional FIR type, with symmetrical ringing either side of the single sample at 0dBFS. With 44.1kHz-sampled white noise (fig.14, red and magenta traces), this filter rolled off fast enough to almost eliminate the aliased product at 25kHz of a full-scale tone at 19.1kHz (blue, cyan). With spot frequencies sampled at 44.1, 96, and 192kHz (fig.15), the nova300's response followed the same basic shape, but with sharp rolloffs just below half of each sample frequency. With USB data sampled at 384kHz, the response was very similar to that at 192kHz, but with a slightly higher output above 50kHz, reaching –16dB at 80kHz. Channel separation via the digital inputs was good, at >90dB below 1kHz, but decreased to 70dB at the top of the audioband.
Increasing the bit depth from 16 to 24 with a dithered 1kHz tone at –90dBS dropped the noise floor by almost 12dB, which implies resolution of 18 bits (fig.16), and the Peachtree readily resolved the three DC voltages with an undithered tone at exactly –90.31dBFS (fig.17), though with more HF noise than the norm. With undithered 24-bit data, the results was a rather noisy sinewave (fig.18). Harmonic and intermodulation distortion were both low in level for digital data.
When I tested the S/PDIF inputs for their rejection of word-clock jitter with 16-bit J-Test data, I got somewhat anomalous results (fig.19). Though there is a strong pair of sidebands spaced 229Hz to either side of the spectral spike that represents a high-level tone at one-quarter the sample rate, the usual odd-order harmonics of the LSB-level tone seem arbitrarily boosted or attenuated. (The correct levels are shown by the sloping green line.) Things looked better with 16-bit USB data (fig.20), though the sidebands at ±229Hz are still higher in level than they should be. They were still present with 24-bit J-Test data with both USB and S/PDIF data (fig.21).
Following our positive review in 2010 of Peachtree's class-AB iDecco, I bought the review sample. It has given sterling service ever since, driving a 35-year-old pair of Celestion SL6 speakers in our 2.0-channel bedroom home-theater system. In most ways, the measured performance of Peachtree's nova300 is better than that of the iDecco, and it has a respectable MM phono stage. However, the high level of switching noise on its output and the less-good behavior of its S/PDIF inputs compared with its USB input raise my eyebrows a little.—John Atkinson
 | |||||||||||
|
|
| |||||||||
COMMENTS
Very strange review... Totally agree with the manufacturer's comment.
"I would never recommend a 300Wpc solid-state, high-resolution, integrated amplifier with a pair of vintage 60-year-old horn loudspeakers. Those should be driven by a moderately powered tube amp and preamp. That's what has always sounded best to me with a speaker like that."
Normally I'd be OK with trying just about anything, as long as it were tried at length to be certain. But in this case I agree with you.
I am shocked and bewildered by this review. Admittedly, I am a fan and owner of Peachtree products, but I'm also a long-time lover of rich-sounding hi-fi systems and quality audio. This write-up simply does not compute with my understanding of or enthusiasm for Peachtree's sonic signature. I'm surprised that Stereophile, which I usually agree with whole-heartedly, would publish a report that's so contradictory to my experience with Peachtree's products. I sincerely hope there was indeed some system mismatch, such as was suggested by Solomon in the manufacturer's comment. Shame...
Soapbox warning: Leave now while you can.
After all of the time I've spent with this unit and so much glowing praise from so many, I was initially shocked and in a state of disbelief. Regardless, I continue to respect and revere the integrity I've known from Stereophile since I was a kid. No one I've known from this long lasting publication writes without passion and a love for music. Most like the gear as well. I know Art to be honest as the day is long and has always been very kind and respectful. Although I don't agree at all with the review based on my own experience, I can easily see how the conclusions were drawn, given the set up.
Thankfully there was a delay because reviews do matter and the fairly harsh and pointed opinions are in direct opposition to every other review of the nova150 or 300. So far, we've received top performance rewards in every review published. Although, I'm guessing we get no reward for this one or if we did, I'm pretty sure we wouldn't be displaying it.
:-(
You'll never be a perfect fit for "all" systems or people, as proven here. There will always be a some product returns and there will always be haters for whatever reasons, so I'm sure you could find a few who don't like what we've done, but the overall feedback has been incredibly positive.
As you can probably tell, we look at Peachtree like our baby (because it is) and it does hurt when she's put in a mismatched in a relationship that never stood a chance.
But I look at the bright side. Hopefully this article and subsequent user experience comments will spawn a flood of curious customers running into our dealers to hear and decide for themselves. Stereophile is welcome to have it back in a system more compatible with our unit.
We allow quite a long audition period and I always tell people to please return it if you only "like it". These are our babies and if you don't love it, I'd rather have it back home.
(Last note: This finish is not available. This was a first run picture that's no longer in our art circulation.)
Onward and upward. Breaking into chorus of " I believe I can fly "
David Solomon
Peachtree Audio
I dunno what others are reading into this, but I caught on to what Dudley was getting at with the "slightly grainy" etc. Perhaps that 'grainy' was raised to an exaggerated level by the choice of speakers or other ancillary components, but it did seem to be within the acceptable range of reviewer opinion.
Lack of Common Sense, If I were a reviewer of a highly regarded magazine, it would make sense to have a "reference system". I am sure the reviewer love his speakers but cmon using vintage equipment to do reviews does not make sense in my book. This is an example of how we can get blinded by our preferences and not use common sense. At least it would have made sense to have another set of speakers to compare. Don't get me wrong, Vintage equipment can sound great, but I would not use it to review the latest hifi equipment. Very dissapointed
With all due respect given to the estimable Mr. Dudley and his unique system, I'd like to request Herb spend some time with a Nova300 at some point in the near future and submit his impressions. I've owned several pieces of Peachtree Audio gear and have literally sold a half a dozen others to my close friends based on my word-of-mouth raves. I've read ALL of the other reviews of this particular new unit, as I'm eager to ultimately replace my original Nova currently sitting in my rack, and am almost as disappointed as Mr. Solomon himself. Perhaps Mr. Dudley's unit was deficient in some way but I hope not, as I expect immaculate QC from Peachtree 2.0!
A reviewer of modern digital audio equipment should be judging his reviews using equipment that is compatible and accessible to the people who would be buying the product. I can see trying the Peachtree in his vintage system as a fun aside but in this case, DS from PA is correct - there's a big mismatch here. Sort of like reviewing modern video equipment on a 1960s era TV and wondering why the picture isn't so good. OK a bit of an extreme comparison but still valid. Those speakers were not voiced back in the day to be played with a modern high efficiency amplifier. Probably designed with a Macintosh/Marantz or Fisher EL34/EL84 tube amp. I think most readers read Art's review with a bit of a raised eyebrow. The Peachtree deserves a 2nd shot from a Stereophile writer whose system and tastes are more in sync with one another.
Gotta say that I love the backlash. This sort of comment sensitivity is why I read all the way down. A couple questions though. Has anyone considered that given the innumerous reviews praising the above unit, all within the context of modern/contemporary loudspeaker systems (see Manufacturer's Comment), that Maybe Mr. Dudley was providing a valuable insight? I.e., given the overwhelming praise for this amp with B&Ws, why corroborate the known? Is it really so uninteresting and/or offensive that a reviewer review a product within a different context? Might that actually be beneficial to some people?
I agree, to a point. Arts Altecs are likely much more revealing of the characteristics he found than are more current speakers. Having said that, this is the last type of amp I'd use with these speakers. Hard to imagine doing a review like this, using only vintage Altecs. This amp definitely deserves a review using a variety of speakers.
Let me start with, I'm sure I'd enjoy having this Peachtree in my current KEF LS 50 + sub system. I've always liked integrated amps that are all-in-one's with a DAC, lots of connections for devices and sources that can drive just about any 2.0 or 2.1 system. With those requirements you are not missing much with Nova300. I've also always liked the aesthetic of Peachtree amps with curved corners and a wooden case. I was also glad to see them rid of the gimmicky tube/valve on the front faceplate.
What I don't like is the price, digital amps, and the company lacks 'heritage'. Peachtree is sort of a newbie compared to other mfgs. In this price range other integrated amps would get my hard earned cash. Maybe a Rotel 1570 a solid piece of gear with Class AB amps and a great sounding pre-amp and DAC. Parsound has a full featured bad-ass integrated for about the same price or Schiit Audio's Ragnarok.. I could go on but won't..
Thank goodness Peachtree has a decent design an good marketing because the competition for $2500 integrated amps is stiff.
Just skip the review and read JA's measurement section only.
J.A.,
I'm puzzled.
The Peachtree Audio website touts the Nova300 amplifier as having a "World-Class Preamplifier" , stating that the "Previous generation Peachtree preamps had a signal to noise ratio in the range of 95 to 100dB, ..." and that "By contrast, the newly-designed preamp section in the nova300 has a S/N ratio of 111dB."
Peachtree further describes the Nova300 as "Quiet as a Mouse", stating "The nova300 utilizes an extensive power supply and grounding design to ensure the noise floor is pushed as far down as possible to allow the music to shine through. Our engineers spent hours upon hours determining the optimal power supply filtering and grounding scheme to prevent any unwanted noise from finding its way into the signal path. As a result, the nova300 achieves a remarkable dynamic range and signal-to-noise ratio."
https://www.peachtreeaudio.com/nova300-amplifier-with-dac.html
Per Stereophile's Measurements, you state "the unweighted, wideband signal/noise ratio was okay, at 66.5dB. This improved to 84dB when the measurement was restricted to the audioband, and to 87.5dB when A-weighted."
I'm puzzled trying to square Peachtree's touting of the Nova300's preamp S/N ratio of 111db, description of the Nova300 as "Quiet as a Mouse" and achieving "a remarkable" "signal-to-noise ratio" with your measurement statements on signal/noise ratio.
Can you enlighten me?
I'm puzzled trying to square Peachtree's touting of the Nova300's preamp S/N ratio of 111db, description of the Nova300 as "Quiet as a Mouse" and achieving "a remarkable" "signal-to-noise ratio" with your measurement statements on signal/noise ratio.Can you enlighten me?
I measure integrated amplifier S/N ratios in the worst possible case, at the speaker terminals with the volume control set to its maximum. In the case of the nova300, the wideband ratio in the review is dominated by the residual switching noise from the class-D output stage. The audioband ratio is the significant one.
The ratio will increase as the volume control is turned down and will be at its maximum when the control is all the way down. But no-one listens to an amplifier with the volume control all the way down.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
I'll give my endorsement to anyone who can provide amplification in one piece for below $2,500.
Some caution is in order with the new "Classes" of amplification. One venerable brand has 20 watts Class A, blooming into to some multiple of that on some sort of separate track thing-a-ma-jigger. Sorry, I'm not buying it, literally. I'll stick with an older model from the same company.
My prediction is that the used market for amplification will be "heating up" as these new standards become more prevalent. My greatest fear is that a certain western state, nearing 40 million souls, and perfect weather year-round, might consign Class A amplification to midnight smuggling along the Arizona, Nevada, Mexican borders. (Oregon will legislate accordingly and sympathetically.) Maybe you will be allowed Class A amplification if you can certify that it's from renewable sources.
My only wish is that integrated manufacturers would eschew the urge to put DACs into their products. Someone said it best in an article I read somewhere: "the DAC inside your integrated is obsolete the second you take it home." Just focus on amplification, whatever the "Class." Let your consumers decide which DAC they want.
I heard one of the products from this manufacturer in a retailer's showroom. I can't report any deficiencies in the sound. I am glad that this manufacturer, at least, seems to be dispensing with putting a little, Christmas tree light-type, vacuum tube into their products. I don't know who wants this. Another manufacturer seems to be pressing ahead. Good luck getting your little tube replaced for whatever benefit it may have yielded sonically. Maybe a Christmas tree light would actually work as a replacement.
If you want a solid state amplifier, then buy one. If you like tubes, then buy one. If you want one of each for two rooms, so much the better. I must question this "hybrid" approach to putting a little tube in an otherwise solid-state device. Maybe a Christmas tree light, with an easily accessible little door to change the light, or 20-year LED bulbs will achieve the same effect.
At least this manufacturer seems to be abandoning this "hybrid" approach. I'll leave it at that. I will also encourage this manufacturer to prove the case for "DAC-less," non Class-A amplification.
The number of comments alone is telling that something is not right with this review unit.
I heard this same amplifier at the 2016 Rocky Mountain Audio Fest driving very high efficient speakers. They literally turned the volume to the max and I put my ear to the tweeter; it was dead silent! I'm not sure what "grain" art is hearing, but it stands in direct conflict with the amazing sound I heard at the show.
Someone else at Stereophile should do a "2nd opinion " or a "follow up".
I have been reading Stereophile for a couple of years now and enjoy the reviews and technical measurements. Many articles write about the probable decline or death of High End produce, I agree with that for different reasons. When I splash out $500+ for a product I want to know that it is durable, reliable and good performance. Now with that in mind and yet here another article about a product that seems to have something wrong with it. I read the Focal Utopia article on innerfidelity and the inconsistency of the products. I am losing trust in the high-end industry. How do I know that a product works? It drives me down the path of buying Sony, Yamaha, Harmon because these big boys have a quality control department! Perhaps Stereophile can blacklist companies that fail to provide a working product. The High-End industry is failing in credibility people!
I partly agree with this. J. Gordon Holt, the founder of Stereophile, famously said: "Who cares how long it lasts if it doesn't sound good?", and I thought the reverse would be equally true: "Who cares how good it sounds if it doesn't last?" - but high-tech gear that pushes the state of the art is prone to bugs. Be thankful that most of these state of the art products have far fewer bugs than the most popular software that runs on today's computers and cellphones.
BTW, the Focal Elear I had (similar to Utopia) was a breakthrough item, with great reliability. Too many of the reviews of the Utopia and Elear discussed modifications such as changing to different earpads, which changes the sound, and I had the impression that it caused confusion for potential buyers.
It can be a dangerous thing to have an Audiophile review something, you never quite know what to expect.
I clearly recall TAS's Harry Pierson panning loudspeakers that I knew to be outstanding.
Our Mr.Dudley is a "vintage" fan, perhaps a bit quirky, certainly opinionated ( aren't we all? ).
This Nova can output 450 Watts, it has a DAC, it has Phono, it can Wi-Fi, it has a Real Wood cabinet, it's made in good ol' USA and it's only 17 lbs!
It's like a Mustang Convertible with 750 hp. Geeeez
Having a vinyl-horn lover review this thing is like having a Sailboat lover reviewing a 3,000 hp Ocean Racer.
I suppose that this Nova300 review makes sense from Mr.Dudley's point of view but I don't think the design is aimed at his type of owner.
Rather it's seems like a "Real World" product for "Real World" Customers.
Tony in Michigan
ps. I'll bet it'll be a darn good seller
"Having a vinyl-horn lover review this thing is like having a Sailboat lover reviewing a 3,000 hp Ocean Racer."
I wrote code for a Defense Industry CEO to control the instruments on his $35 million racing sailboat. I'll bet he knew how to work a motor when necessary.
This thing is a One Box - does it all.
It's a minor Miracle it made it into an Audiophile Rag for consideration! Audiophiles buy Seperates, for god's sake.
Just add some B&W's with matching Wood Grain and you're ready to pardee.
I'll bet it's half way between a Bose Wave Radio and darTzeel/Wilsons.
$2,500 outa the box, how bad could it be?, it's a Peachtree!
Anyway, Jana should'a been the reviewer, the Nova is aimed at her generation not seasoned Audiophiles.
Tony in Michigan
Something I missed in Peachtree's response: "This finish is not available. This was a first run picture that's no longer in our art circulation."
So the very look of this product was just "Art circulation"? Reminds me of Frank Zappa asking "What will you do when the coating comes off?"
Whalllleeee, it's an early pre-release item they pushed out to get some Sizzle excitement.
I'll bet that they've got more stuff that this thing will be able to do along with some Software development yet to be announced.
By the way, are you aware the Firefly Red is now MQA capable?
Tony in Michigan
I dread updating my DF Red. Just like I dread updating my iPhone 7. I can't even use the DF Red with my iPhone 7 because of constant interference, even though I have every non-essential communication setting turned off. All auto-updates, background refresh etc. turned off. I checked every sub-menu and made sure of it. Fortunately I have an iPod Touch, which works with the DF Red with Wifi and Bluetooth off, and Airplane Mode ON.
The original picture was changed. The finish shown in the main picture is Gloss Ebony Mocha and is available.
Good, thanks. As an aside, if you have or are creating a paper to correlate the significance of Atkinson's "worst-case" S/N measurement with something that offers insight on how that plays out in listening under best (very quiet) conditions, I'd like to bookmark that article. Just having the extremes of -111 db and "worst case" loading to judge from, I'm lost.
JA's response to my request above (my request: "I'm puzzled trying to square Peachtree's touting of the Nova300's preamp S/N ratio of 111db, description of the Nova300 as "Quiet as a Mouse" and achieving "a remarkable" "signal-to-noise ratio" with your measurement statements on signal/noise ratio. Can you enlighten me?") added a smidgen of clarification but did not square the perceived discrepancy.
Lost and puzzled but not dazed; only confused.
I'd really like to have the Nova compared with the Parasound Halo Intergrated. They sell at the same price, they are both Intergrated Amps with DACs and while the Nova is more powerful, they both offer lots of power and value for the money. I doubt that will happen but a shootout would be a good thing. It's a shame that JA doesn't do in the US what was done in the UK.
It seems odd to use vintage speakers, nay, rebuilt vintage speakers and complain of graininess. I would be very surprised if the THD of the speakers was less than 5% (or maybe even 10% or more) which would seem to make discerning the quality difficult at best.
I've not listened to the new Peachtree and can offer nothing in that respect. However, I am impressed with Peachtree's very classy response to Art's review and for anyone in the industry that may see this, pay attention, that's how to respond.
As I read Art's review, I found myself nodding and saying, "Yup, sounds like another switching amp."
Something is going on with this technology that just doesn't sit well with a certain subset of audio nerds like me and it's always in the upper frequencies.
I just purchased the Peachtree Nova 300 integrated amp. It replaced an NAD C390DD. I have PSB Symphony One speakers. I thought the NAD sounded great, with some slight boom in the bass. Now with the Peachtree, the bass is tighter, the soundstage is better, the ability to hear each instrument is improved, the sound is a little warmer, not as shrill as it was with the NAD. The added power of the Peachtree can be heard right away. It's the best sounding amp I've owned. It's fabulous. I recommend it. The price is right. Plus, Peachtree let's you trade in your old amp for a decent credit on the Peachtree. I kept my NAD but they did provide a good offer for my old Creek.
Oh ! This one looks exactly like the Quad Vena, except for its higher price. I wonder if it sounds alike too lol.. Better?? I don't think so. Wonder why would anyone pay more than double for a copycat ??
The $900 Quad Vena bluetooth amp with DAC will beat any bluetooth amp 10x its price. It could easily sell 3x higher than its current price if it was made in the UK
Sorry, but not even close. I admit they look alike.. in fact, I thought the Vena was a cheaper copy of the Peachtree. I bought the Vena, but coming from an Oppo HA-1 feeding a Parasound A23, it sounded veiled and weak (and the tiny remote is useless).OK..that's a bit strong, it's not bad for the price and facilities, but I wasn't impressed. So I replaced it with the Nova 150. Light years better sound, period (and the remote is much better too).
And I have to agree with others. .Art is great, but clearly the speakers were a poor match. This is an amazing sounding system for the price, and currently going into my new KEF LS50s and REL T5i, the best sound I've had in my 43 years of buying audio.
The Quad Vena's look is a traditional similar to their preamps from the 60's QC II and their latest TwentyFour. How would an 80yr old company copy a company that hasn't even been around for over 10 years? Besides, Quad Vena came out to the market earlier than the Peachtree's. You've had 43 years of buying audio and you're using some chinese designed Oppo's ?? And that answers every question here. 'Guess you didn't learn much for 43 years LOL
Gosh, you're a lot of fun. Enjoy your Vena. I've owned both, and the Vena is not in the same league as the Nova. China bashing says all I need to know about you.
Grow up and learn something, boy !
I've had nova for a month now, and it's amazing. The amp is so quite and revealing. It sounds better than my Schiit Bifost DAC and Creative phono preamp separates. I don't hear any of "harshness" that the review calls out. But then again, I'm using modern speakers (Evolution Acoustics MMMicroOne).
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Features | |
Show Reports | |
Show Reports Latest News Community | |
Recommended Components Products of the Year Blogs |
|
Shop Resources Subscriptions |
© 2020 Stereophile
