Coach_Kaarlo
Active Member
I love the Benchmark effect. Accurate, transparent reproduction of what is recorded without colouration or alteration. I like it so much that I just ordered a second AHB2.
But it's not for that slightly obvious reason. After some old school analog blind testing it seems there is something to the thoughts others have voiced regarding grunt and attack (lack of power). Let me (try to) explain what I experienced and then pose a question for those perhaps able to answer it slightly more scientifically.
System 1 = An old Accuphase P300 with 180W per channel measured (claimed 150W), and a slew rate over 20v/ms, driving a pair of Yamaha NS-2000 speakers.
http://www.accuphase.com/cat/pcten.pdf
https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/yamaha/ns-2000.shtml
System 2 = DAC2-HGC and AHB2 driving the same Yamaha NS-2K speakers.
Many many areas of sound/ speaker performance were better. Transparency, clarity, accuracy. The Benchmark gear exceeds expectations and delivers on the the hype etc. Then we started being more analytical and trying to isolate various categories of accuracy - vocal realism, instrument separation in classical, etc etc.
After some very enjoyable listening the Benchmark missed a step. The selection was a Roger Waters track (@ 6 min 10 sec into It's a Miracle from Amused to Death) with real kick drum "kick". Listening at 70dB and then again at 90dB with each system showed up a big difference. Unmistakable, clear, and a confusing difference. The understanding I had was the AHB2 can drive any speaker, and the Accuphase is quite similar in power (slightly more). What I heard was a lack of authenticity in the reproduction of the kick drum attack / leading edge (of the sound). The Accuphase was able to move the drivers sufficiently to deliver both the real sound and physical force of the kick drum in a life-like way, and the low frequency driver movement / stroke was also visible. The Benchmark not only failed to reproduce the sound but was unable to move the driver visibly at all. Changing the Benchmark into mono and repeating the test with one speaker solved the physical movement and improved the sound greatly, but it was still just a little off the reference sound of a pair of HD-650 headphones plugged into the DAC produced, and still behind the old Accuphase.
Yes, there are many gaps and holes in my both my knowledge and my experiment (if you could call it that). However it seems to me that the grunt needed to move those big old 33cm (13 inch) cones and magnets might be beyond a single AHB2 in stereo.
What have I missed? What have others experienced? And before you respond at least try and reproduce the sound I am talking about for yourself.
Cheers.
But it's not for that slightly obvious reason. After some old school analog blind testing it seems there is something to the thoughts others have voiced regarding grunt and attack (lack of power). Let me (try to) explain what I experienced and then pose a question for those perhaps able to answer it slightly more scientifically.
System 1 = An old Accuphase P300 with 180W per channel measured (claimed 150W), and a slew rate over 20v/ms, driving a pair of Yamaha NS-2000 speakers.
http://www.accuphase.com/cat/pcten.pdf
https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/yamaha/ns-2000.shtml
System 2 = DAC2-HGC and AHB2 driving the same Yamaha NS-2K speakers.
Many many areas of sound/ speaker performance were better. Transparency, clarity, accuracy. The Benchmark gear exceeds expectations and delivers on the the hype etc. Then we started being more analytical and trying to isolate various categories of accuracy - vocal realism, instrument separation in classical, etc etc.
After some very enjoyable listening the Benchmark missed a step. The selection was a Roger Waters track (@ 6 min 10 sec into It's a Miracle from Amused to Death) with real kick drum "kick". Listening at 70dB and then again at 90dB with each system showed up a big difference. Unmistakable, clear, and a confusing difference. The understanding I had was the AHB2 can drive any speaker, and the Accuphase is quite similar in power (slightly more). What I heard was a lack of authenticity in the reproduction of the kick drum attack / leading edge (of the sound). The Accuphase was able to move the drivers sufficiently to deliver both the real sound and physical force of the kick drum in a life-like way, and the low frequency driver movement / stroke was also visible. The Benchmark not only failed to reproduce the sound but was unable to move the driver visibly at all. Changing the Benchmark into mono and repeating the test with one speaker solved the physical movement and improved the sound greatly, but it was still just a little off the reference sound of a pair of HD-650 headphones plugged into the DAC produced, and still behind the old Accuphase.
Yes, there are many gaps and holes in my both my knowledge and my experiment (if you could call it that). However it seems to me that the grunt needed to move those big old 33cm (13 inch) cones and magnets might be beyond a single AHB2 in stereo.
What have I missed? What have others experienced? And before you respond at least try and reproduce the sound I am talking about for yourself.
Cheers.