And worse sometimes, the unit actually breaking (like @capslock's unit) from a simple overload.
To me the whole thing smells like a clear marketing decision to use the isolated ASR "Top 5Watt SINAD" rating as free advertising and hence neglect anything that produces additional cost and efforts, knowing that Amir's test protocol is not very extensive. A bit of roulette playing involved as it was not clear if Amir's test would show the blatant power issues but they won, it still got the golfing panther and the full recommendation. Mission accomplished.
It's really sad that Topping engineers were not allowed to create an overall package that matches the truly excellent distortion and noise specs.
Why on earth didn't they put in a proper balanced input which would not have increased cost? In the light of all the engineering that went into the amp core this makes no sense.
The engineers also certainly have been aware of the power issues with that measly heatsink that would be already marginal for a Class-D design, let alone a linear one. But marketing said it's got to be the current Topping form factor to match their DACs for a nice Topping stack.
In order to make this thread even more useful than it already is I suggest that it would also be nice if some of the many experts, sellers and manufacturers present on this thread would post some valid alternatives to the B100 for 500 bucks.
However, ASR seems almost an obsession for someone (please note that I didn't say it's an obsession, I said it "almost seems" to me like an obsession to someone), I've only recently noticed them because the Internet is so wide and I don't care much about measurements (I care about the proper functioning, of course).
I honestly don't know how one can be so sure that ASR is so important to the public.
Just as an example FWIW, for me it's not like that.
However, ASR seems almost an obsession for someone (please note that I didn't say it's an obsession, I said it "almost seems" to me like an obsession to someone), I've only recently noticed them because the Internet is so wide and I don't care much about measurements (I care about the proper functioning, of course).
I honestly don't know how one can be so sure that ASR is so important to the public.
Just as an example FWIW, for me it's not like that.
I am not expert, sellers, or manufacturer, just a decent engineer. Topping B100 is 600USD. With that money you can get a decent NC252MP amplifier. It is class D, so it can withstand 50W continuous without any problem.
Great choice, I love Hypex amps.
Although someone with Class D have some prejudices.
Although someone with Class D have some prejudices.
Shenzhenaudio has actually them for 254.15 USD each.
Heck, I'm the one that normally types too much, but I'll try to summarize what I've picked up so far -
None of the 'engineers' in the group have answered the one simple question I've asked. How would they report the wattage of the B100?
If the B100 were advertised at the wattage rating using their preferred methodology (and/or FTC / EU standards) and all other performance aspects of the amplifier remained the same, would they still consider it a 'bad' amplifier OR would they simply say that it's overpriced? None of the above?
My gut says people are mad at ASR vs. Topping. Topping is just servicing a market. ASR created the market. Don't like it? Go start a web site evaluating audio gear and change the world. I'll be waiting. It would be fantastic.
- There are some standards in place, particularly for power rating, distortion measurement, and advertising guidance at a federal and trade block level in the USA and EU.
- Topping / ASR et. al. do not use those to report their measurements
- There is no globally accepted 'industry' standard separate from legal standards
- The "engineers" in the group seem upset that ASR has a following that seems to have shaped at least one manufacturer into designing into that standard.
None of the 'engineers' in the group have answered the one simple question I've asked. How would they report the wattage of the B100?
If the B100 were advertised at the wattage rating using their preferred methodology (and/or FTC / EU standards) and all other performance aspects of the amplifier remained the same, would they still consider it a 'bad' amplifier OR would they simply say that it's overpriced? None of the above?
My gut says people are mad at ASR vs. Topping. Topping is just servicing a market. ASR created the market. Don't like it? Go start a web site evaluating audio gear and change the world. I'll be waiting. It would be fantastic.
No, just gullible. The real "villains" are the reviewer taking inadequate set of measurements and the manufacturer taking advantage of that.
It is not about ASR, nor the product itself. It is about this misleading advertisement of this product.
And the question about how to report the wattage of the B100. Simply choose one of the well known standard (like the FTC one), measure and show.
Or at least do what serious manufacturer like Benchmark or NAD or Accuphase do
Example:
NAD M22
INE IN, SPEAKER OUT
Continuous output power into 8 Ω and 4 Ω (Stereo) >250W (at rated THD, 20Hz-20kHz, both channels driven)
THD+N 20Hz - 20kHz, CCIF IMD, SMPTE IMD, DIM 100 <0.003% (250mW to rated power, 8 Ω and 4 Ω)
Clipping Power (8 Ω) >300W (at 1kHz 0.1% THD)
IHF Dynamic Power
8 Ohms 355W
4 Ohms 640W
2 Ohms 640W
Peak Output Current >50A (ref. 1 Ω, 1ms)
Signal/Noise Ratio,
A-weighted, ref 1W >100dB
A-weighted, ref rated power >120dB
Accuphase P7100
Continuous Average Output Power (20 - 20,000 Hz)
Stereo operation 1000 watts per channel into 1 ohm (*)
(both channels driven) 500 watts per channel into 2 ohms
250 watts per channel into 4 ohms
125 watts per channel into 8 ohms
Monophonic operation 2,000 watts into 2 ohms (*)
(bridged connection) 1,000 watts into 4 ohms
500 watts into 8 ohms
Note: Load ratings marked (*) apply only to operation with music signals.
Total Harmonic Distortion
Stereo operation (both channels driven) 0.05% with 2 ohm load
0.03% with 4 to 16 ohm load
Monophonic operation (bridged connection) 0.03% with 4 to 16 ohm load
Intermodulation Distortion 0.01%
Frequency Response At rated output: 20 - 20,000 Hz +0, –0.2 dB
At 1 watt output: 0.5 - 160,000 Hz +0, –3.0 dB
And the question about how to report the wattage of the B100. Simply choose one of the well known standard (like the FTC one), measure and show.
Or at least do what serious manufacturer like Benchmark or NAD or Accuphase do
Example:
NAD M22
INE IN, SPEAKER OUT
Continuous output power into 8 Ω and 4 Ω (Stereo) >250W (at rated THD, 20Hz-20kHz, both channels driven)
THD+N 20Hz - 20kHz, CCIF IMD, SMPTE IMD, DIM 100 <0.003% (250mW to rated power, 8 Ω and 4 Ω)
Clipping Power (8 Ω) >300W (at 1kHz 0.1% THD)
IHF Dynamic Power
8 Ohms 355W
4 Ohms 640W
2 Ohms 640W
Peak Output Current >50A (ref. 1 Ω, 1ms)
Signal/Noise Ratio,
A-weighted, ref 1W >100dB
A-weighted, ref rated power >120dB
Accuphase P7100
Continuous Average Output Power (20 - 20,000 Hz)
Stereo operation 1000 watts per channel into 1 ohm (*)
(both channels driven) 500 watts per channel into 2 ohms
250 watts per channel into 4 ohms
125 watts per channel into 8 ohms
Monophonic operation 2,000 watts into 2 ohms (*)
(bridged connection) 1,000 watts into 4 ohms
500 watts into 8 ohms
Note: Load ratings marked (*) apply only to operation with music signals.
Total Harmonic Distortion
Stereo operation (both channels driven) 0.05% with 2 ohm load
0.03% with 4 to 16 ohm load
Monophonic operation (bridged connection) 0.03% with 4 to 16 ohm load
Intermodulation Distortion 0.01%
Frequency Response At rated output: 20 - 20,000 Hz +0, –0.2 dB
At 1 watt output: 0.5 - 160,000 Hz +0, –3.0 dB
Last edited:
^ Perhaps my question is not clear enough.
Given the data available; how would you or @Bonsai rate and advertise the B100 wattage?
Would it be:
8W 8R
4W 4R
I have no idea.
IF it were advertised "properly", would you consider it to be a 'bad' amplifier or just overpriced? Do you not like the amp itself or just the advertising?
Just like distortion, people keep saying that ASR and Topping measured it wrong. Fine! They measured it "wrong". If it were measured and advertised properly, is it a 'bad' amplifier (to the engineering crowd)?
Given the data available; how would you or @Bonsai rate and advertise the B100 wattage?
Would it be:
8W 8R
4W 4R
I have no idea.
IF it were advertised "properly", would you consider it to be a 'bad' amplifier or just overpriced? Do you not like the amp itself or just the advertising?
Just like distortion, people keep saying that ASR and Topping measured it wrong. Fine! They measured it "wrong". If it were measured and advertised properly, is it a 'bad' amplifier (to the engineering crowd)?
We need a B100 for testing, after that we can demonstrate the exactly number. From my engineering POV, with this kind of heatsink and air cooling in this box, it is not better than 15W / 4 Ohms continuous output power.
But format will be like the way NAD or Accuphase does.
IF it were advertised "properly", I don't consider it as 'bad' amplifier or overpriced. Why, because customer is well-informed about the limitation of this amplifier, so they can made correct decision, and buy it to power the high sensitivity speakers (>92 dB/1W/1m). And 600 USD for low noise, low distortion amplifier to power high sensitivity speaker is not overpriced.
ASR measure wrong not because the spec is not important, but because they overemphasize on one aspect while neglect other important aspects. With DAC, it is somewhat ok. But for power amplifier, it is bad since people buy amplifier to power their speakers. And those SINAD 1kHz number is meaningless if the amplifier goes to protection mode on fairly standard bookshelf speaker, aka does not output sound at all.
But format will be like the way NAD or Accuphase does.
IF it were advertised "properly", I don't consider it as 'bad' amplifier or overpriced. Why, because customer is well-informed about the limitation of this amplifier, so they can made correct decision, and buy it to power the high sensitivity speakers (>92 dB/1W/1m). And 600 USD for low noise, low distortion amplifier to power high sensitivity speaker is not overpriced.
ASR measure wrong not because the spec is not important, but because they overemphasize on one aspect while neglect other important aspects. With DAC, it is somewhat ok. But for power amplifier, it is bad since people buy amplifier to power their speakers. And those SINAD 1kHz number is meaningless if the amplifier goes to protection mode on fairly standard bookshelf speaker, aka does not output sound at all.
Last edited:
I agree, but only to an extent.
I'm reasonably certain that those that buy products off of ASR's recommendations would voice their opinions quite loudly if they didn't think the product performed well for their applications.
People can freely disagree re: what's "important" about any particular product. There are a great number of people that seem to disagree quite mightily with ASR's techniques for evaluating amplifiers. It baffles me how ASR can consider itself reputable when they don't include measurements that are required by statute/regulation in the USA and EU. Separate from that, they can feel free to tell anyone what they think is valuable about the performance of an amplifier => what makes an amplifier "good" in their view. In my view, the product needs to be safe and legal to sell (meets advertised claims and safety standards). After that... it's just market differentiation.
The manufacturer isn't "taking advantage" of it in a negative way, in my view. They're a manufacturer / brand. They go where the customers are. They're engineering into a market. They're taking advantage of it in quite a good / business smart way.
Now, if someone were to come up with some "better" standard that a large market adopts and buys into, my guess is that Topping would adapt.
But, until someone comes up with another standard that's adopted by many...
Last edited:
The Accuphase would be way down on the ASR ranking because of its distortion. I’ve heard Accuphase amps and they are superb sounding amplifiers.
I don't remember subjective listening being a part of your proposed evaluation protocol. Should it be?
At the moment it seems that any stress testing could put the device stuck in a broken state permanently and thanks to the governing microcontroller it will not easy if not impossible to repair even for experts.
That is clearly the job of the manufacturer. Let me give an example, the ICEpower 300A1 module. As the name suggest, it is capable of 300 Watts but the datasheet is very clear about what is realistic for this module which has only radiation and convection cooling, they state "130W@4R FTC rated power" and "38W@4R continuous power at 50°C ambient temperature", and "120 seconds of 300W@4R rated power at 25°C ambient".
Nothing would stop Topping to do the same, continue advertising and selling the amp as a "100W" model but give clear answers in the small printed stuff that is is good for only 10 Watts continuous at, say, 30°C ambient... or whatever the exact value would be. And of course the FTC rated power for sake of fair comparison to other amps.
Last edited:
It's easy enough to understand that THD measurement doesn't necessarily correlate with ... oh, wait, some people just want to be argumentative. Off to get more popcorn.
Because for majority of ASR members, 5W 1kHz SINAD and cheap is all what they care about. Other important factors like build quality to last, ability to drive any possible loads at all level, reliability have no impact on them. Sadly, those qualities is where the high cost ist.
And I also heard many Accuphase amps, and agree with you completely that they sound superb. Right now, I have a feeling that the THD at absolute number is not really correlated with sound quality. Yes, it needs to be at certain level, and/or has decent profile just 2nd distortion and 3rd distortion, and no higher order distortions. But beyond that, other aspects like CMRR of the whole amplifier, ability to supply enough current to avoid clipping and keep THD relatively low at any level are more important. And that is what I think Accuphase does right in my book. Their instrumentation topologies with gain in the first stage helps CMRR greatly to reject common mode distortion. And the massive parallel transistor at OPS of second stage (bias at optimum 0.22V) ensures their amps not clipping at any level on any load. Their distortion profile is good also, for example the A-300 measured in Stereophile even at 75W the high order distortion is absent.
Right now I build a version of PGP amps with vertical fet output with the goals to have THD+N < 0.0001% at 200W/4 Ohms from 20-20kHz, but it is just for my ego 😀
Yes, it is.
And some people have nothing to add to the conversation. 🙂
Please chew quietly.
That's the tricky part. I'm not sure how overall 'reliable' household appliances are where you live. Anecdotally, in the USA, I think most are simply terrible from a reliability standpoint. Some of that is driven by new industry / government standards. Some of that is a slow erosion of "perceived quality" expected through the consumer base. In some parts of the world, the quality accepted by the American public is appalling. We tend to accept "flashy and cheap" and throw it away when it breaks. Sure, that's anecdotal vs. fact, but it's my impression. Manufacturers that charge a premium for longer-lasting products have a hard time. Also, in certain parts of the world, what is "legal" for an American warranty would not be allowed. So, we get things that if they break after 6 months, it's cheaper to toss in the bin than to repair them. Also, up until fairly recently, the manufacturers largely had the upper hand in even preventing us from repairing our own products if they broke... <end rant>.
Thanks for sharing your insights.
I agree. My poor wording of the original question caused confusion. My intent was not to ask how should it be measured by a reputable company. My intent was to derive how (given the information available) the experts in the crowd would advertise the wattage of the B100.
Again, I agree wholeheartedly.
The issue seems to be the claims around the power delivery of the amplifier, not the actual performance of the amplifier up to some (as yet to be determined) "properly" rated power output into various "realistic" loads.