The lack of consistency is due to each product releasing seemingly far apart from each design. But when I say lack of consistency, I don't mean in totality, I mean simply in virtue of looking at Eastern products that produce constantly new versions, so they have the luxury of thinking about each part of a stack.
I also don't think the power amp is mean't to be stacked with anything due to the heat a power amp produces. As far as the DAC and the HP4A, It's somewhat close, but I see your point (things like feat size and height really have no valid excuse in my book). Since this is a New York outfit (these devices, if finished with Matrix Audio levels of enclosure design, would be in the 5-figure range given the performance) you should expect some corner cutting in terms of the enclosure design and cohesion.
But I think Benchmark isn't concerned with this. They want to offer a device with Benchmark levels of performance, and no corner cutting on things like safety and functionality. I don't think they really care all the much about a product looking like it hails from an Italian design studio or something like that. If they did, they would make updates more often (the ABH2 is I think now over half a decade old). Side note, pretty interesting to see no one is even close on the SINAD charts in terms of power amps, even after all this time. There's a clear noticeable bump over ever other power amp measured. Why the industry is so nonchalant about Benchmark reigning like a King is beyond me (then again with the amount of shovelware that ends up doing fine on the market, it's not really much of a surprise).
EDIT: Forgot to include image of what I mean't when I mentioned Matrix Audio. Check out the milling work done on their Sabre DAC. This would be at an insane cost if you were going to get them CNC'd here in New York.
View attachment 142930
It’s true that Benchmark don’t refresh their products often and there is some validity to the statement that they have introduced most of these products at different times, hence the different designs and lack of consistency. The DAC2 was released in 2012 and the design carries to today in the DAC3, which was released in 2017. The AHB2 came out in 2014. However, the DAC3B and the HPA4 were both released in 2018 as complimentary to each other products and that’s where they had the opportunity to create a proper combo to at least match the overall dimensions of the AHB2. The fact that they don’t do frequent releases in my mind makes it even more important to get the matching exteriors right.
From my perspective, the brushed aluminum faceplates are beautiful(especially in black) and the overall clean design of the LA4 is perfectly fine. I wasn’t alluding to any fancy Italian designer type enclosures, which would bring the price points to exorbitant levels. I was simply referring to paying attention to basic details and not disregarding glaringly obvious mismatches such as non-matching feet, enclosure dimensions, heatsinks, labels, etc.
These are totally cosmetic issues that from a cost benefit perspective would add minimal cost to the overall price of the product but would add substantial visual improvement and synergy. If the rackmount faceplate with the heatsinks adds $200 to the price of the LA4, the heatsinks alone are probably $100. I would gladly pay it to have them. Adding a power button label and a model label on the faceplate for consistency is probably totally immaterial. The display is already there, all it needs is a software update to rearrange how the information is presented and make it more usable with large volume digits. That’s it. Small expense but It would have contributed to a perfectly finished product that they don’t have to update for many years to come. Just bring all future products in line with that design.
The DAC3 B should have also shared the same enclosure and screen that was developed for the LA4 if it was specifically designed to be paired with the LA4. It would probably make the enclosure cost more scalable too if the same enclosure is used across multiple components. Same internals as in the other DAC3s. Just engineer and program the screen for the DAC info and we would have an absolute winner. I can’t see using the LA4 enclosure for the DAC making it substantially more expensive, but from a looks perspective it would have been a very substantial upgrade.
As for your side note on SINADs and the competition, I hadn’t even looked at the competition in 7 years as i have been perfectly happy with the sound and amazing specs. There was nothing even close in 2014 to the AHB2 or the DAC2 when i bought mine. The LA4 recently got me interested so I got back into the audio scene. I did some digging this morning and i see some interesting changes. Considering that the LA4/AHB2 are 1st generation products, they are quite remarkable in terms of engineering. I give Benchmark tremendous credit for what they have achieved. Especially at the time of their releases. The AHB2 is almost 7 years old and other companies are still catching up even though we are starting to see some formidable competition, like for example the Apollon Audio PNC1200 Stereo Amplifier which has 137db SNR, 40 amps of current, 400W per channel @8oms, stable @2ohms with 1200W costing EUR 4,500. They have them in monoblocks for EUR2,500. Regarding the LA4/HPA4, from an engineering standpoint, they created an absolutely phenomenal products at the time of their release. An SNR of 137db is quite remarkable to this day and an engineering statement in itself. Adding a display, introduces a new circuit and one would expect a noise penalty yet, the engineers improved upon the specs of the AHB2, an astonishing achievement. However, again the competition seems to be catching up to them. The Topping Pre90 pre amp has 145db SNR. Their D90SE DAC has 134db SNR and all with extremely low THD, costing a fraction. It’s only a matter of time until they release a comparable amp. Same with the SMSL DACs-131 db SNR, THX AAA-888 Headphone AMP with 133db SNR, costing few hundred dollars. Again it’s only a matter of time until they get their amps up to par with the AHB2. They also have beautiful network streamers.
So, the competition seems to be getting some products better already in terms of specs and in design in some cases, but i don’t see one company yet that has a full chain of streamer+dac+pre-amp+amp that would entice you in their eco-system completely for the aesthetics and matching or better specs than Benchmark. I think that’s their opportunity.
This brings me back to my earlier point that Benchmark really need to work on their design synergy, modernize and streamline the looks of all components and add a network streamer to entice people into its ecosystem or in a few years the competition will eat them alive, in some cases for a fraction of the cost, because the specs on many will be so good, better than hearing capability, that they become irrelevant, so looks, power and synergy become the differentiating factors. If Benchmark’s individual components are mismatched or look dated, people will not be inclined to go all in on Benchmark and will look at other companies to pick individual components for their performance and/or looks or go for complete systems once available at matching specs and better looks.