Yamaha A- S801 or Arcam SA 20 to drive Monitor Audio Gold 100 5g

[smallboydanger]

Your experience with the A870 not sounding good with those speakers (which TLSGuy determined to have some difficult loads) may be well justified!
I think it safe to presume that the A870 is the same as the amp section of the A860, which Gene determined to be an exceptionally weak amp and also having marginal pre-amp outputs!
Here is a link to his review and a quote of teh relevant comments on the shortcomings of this Yamaha AVR:

Yamaha RX-A860 AVENTAGE 7.2 Atmos/DTS:X A/V Receiver Review

The Yamaha AVENTAGE RX-A860 7.2CH Atmos/DTS:X AV receiver is packed with excellent networking features but it does fall short on power delivery making our recommendation conditional based on usage.

www.audioholics.com

From the last section of this review: "Suggestions for Improvements"

Don't get me wrong it sounds fine especially for movies but my old Arcam 250 avr is far better for music

 

[smallboydanger]

The 870 is not great for music? You're still going to be using it for your processing anyway so I wouldn't expect any difference in sound quality, tho the Yamaha might run cooler. The 801 specs almost identical with the 870.

Nice speakers you got there, btw. What kind of subs are you running?

B K XLS 200 sub,
I wont be using the AVR 870 for for processing music as I will attach a dedicated streamer directly to the integrated amp

 

[smallboydanger]

The A-S801 is an AVR based integrated amp, not a real thing in my book. It does have a more powerful amp section with a larger power supply that is more suited to 4 ohm speakers (not much a factor though if you sit close enough). Imo, many got sucked into it based on Yamaha's excellent marketing material, forum hearsay/review, plus perhaps to some extent, the good reviews on its predecessor A-S700, that is what I would consider a real integrated amp. That is, one that is not based on AVRs.

You Monitor Audio gold bookshelf can only handle 120 W right, and that's 4 ohms so the RX-A870 should still be adequate for the job if you are sitting close enough to the speakers. Your photo seems to show a bed room system, but what is the seating distance anyway?

I highly doubt it could sound really better the way you connect them together even if it is a power output related issue. If it is not about power, then I have no idea why/how it could do better with two preamps in the signal path.

If you want to use an amp with an AVR you should stick to a power amp, or an integrated amp that has the HT bypass feature as other have mentioned. Please also note that Yamaha AVRs, at least the ones below the RX-A1080, typically don't do well as preamp because of their relative high distortions when the output voltage exceeds 1 to 1.2 V. Gene mentioned something to that effect in his review of the RX-A860.

Seating distance is 7 feet. Like I said I replaced a 20 year old Arcam Avr with the yamaha 870 thats how come I ended up with two Avrs but discovered that whilst the yamaha was brilliant for movies when it came to 2 channel music my old Arcam was far superior. working on the same principle i am looking at keeping the 870 for movies but needed something better for when Im listening to music , any knowledge of the Arcam sa 20?

 

[KEW]

Don't get me wrong it sounds fine especially for movies but my old Arcam 250 avr is far better for music

The point is there should not be a difference for music (unless you had some processing interfering with the signal)!
To sound their best, your speakers need exceptionally good, strong power, capable of managing difficult loads and the A870 does not provide it. There is no magic secret sauce to your Arcam, it is simply more capable of driving your speakers!
This is a mature science and unless someone decides to deliberately color or distort the sound (which is not something I would expect from Arcam or Yamaha). It seems that your Yamaha is simply underpowered for your speakers. We have had others with similar complaints who solved it by replacing their A860 or A870 AVR.
The review of the A860 I linked (which is based on bench tested performance) states:

this is the first time I'd actually caution people against using 4 ohm speakers

TLSGuy made it clear (also based on measurements) that your speakers drop to 2.7 ohms (well below the 4 ohms that Gene cautions about - lower is worse in this case) and the -65 degree phase make those especially demanding speakers!

 

[TLS Guy]

The point is there should not be a difference for music (unless you had some processing interfering with the signal)!
To sound their best, your speakers need exceptionally good, strong power, capable of managing difficult loads and the A870 does not provide it. There is no magic secret sauce to your Arcam, it is simply more capable of driving your speakers!
This is a mature science and unless someone decides to deliberately color or distort the sound (which is not something I would expect from Arcam or Yamaha). It seems that your Yamaha is simply underpowered to get the best out of your speakers. We have had others with similar complaints who solved it by replacing their A860 or A870 AVR.
The review of the A860 I linked (which is based on bench tested performance) states:

TLSGuy made it clear (also based on measurements) that your speakers drop to 2.7 ohms (well below the 4 ohms that Gene cautions about - lower is worse in this case) and the -65 degree phase make those especially demanding speakers!

They are also not good speakers though. Those speakers I not what I could live with. I'm pretty sure the crossover is in resonance given those numbers. If so that would stress any amp. A 2.7 ohm impedance with a - 65 degree phase angle would stress any amp anyway. The waterfall plot shows severe problems at crossover. You can tell the baffle step compensation is not well handled either. I have to say I remain baffled why these problems continue to surface in the speaker market place. This speaker is a simple two way for Heaven's sake. I would have thought to make that much of a dogs dinner of it would require work, but I suppose it was actually just severe laziness. It still just makes me scratch my head. With all the sophisticated design aids available now there is just no excuse for it.

 

[KEW]

They are also not good speakers though. Those speakers I not what I could live with. I'm pretty sure the crossover is in resonance given those numbers. If so that would stress any amp. A 2.7 ohm impedance with a - 65 degree phase angle would stress any amp anyway. The waterfall plot shows severe problems at crossover. You can tell the baffle step compensation is not well handled either. I have to say I remain baffled why these problems continue to surface in the speaker market place. This speaker is a simple two way for Heaven's sake. I would have thought to make that much of a dogs dinner of it would require work, but I suppose it was actually just severe laziness. It still just makes me scratch my head. With all the sophisticated design aids available now there is just no excuse for it.

I was wondering if his Arcam really did the job or was just "better". Sounds like the latter!
Sad that these companies are not doing a better job! You would think for all of the funds that get committed to bringing on a new speaker line, the commitment to the best design possible would be a priority!

 

[lovinthehd]

Aren't the goofy speaker designs just to help sell bigger amps?

 

[smallboydanger]

Seating distance is 7 feet. Like I said I replaced a 20 year old Arcam Avr with the yamaha 870 thats how come I ended up with two Avrs but discovered that whilst the yamaha was brilliant for movies when it came to 2 channel music my old Arcam was far superior. working on the same principle i am looking at keeping the 870 for movies but needed something better for when Im listening to music , any knowledge of the Arcam sa 20?

Could you please explain when you say the 801 is an avr based intergrated Amp?

 

[lovinthehd]

Could you please explain when you say the 801 is an avr based intergrated Amp?

FYI you're quoting your own post but think you want @PENG to explain further....as he's done a coupla times before (i.e. in other threads).

 

[PENG]

Don't get me wrong it sounds fine especially for movies but my old Arcam 250 avr is far better for music

Did you read the ASR(audiosciencereview.com) reviews on 2 Arcam recently, the AVR390 and an AV processor? They both measured a lot worse than the lower end Denon and Yamaha AVRs. You may still think the Arcams sound better, and there isn't much we can say about that other than in a DBT you won't be able to tell a difference in pure direct mode and level matched.

 

[Beave]

NRC measurements of the Monitor Audio Gold 100 5G confirm issues that TLS Guy brought up:

https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2204:nrc-measurements-monitor-audio-gold-100-loudspeakers&catid=77:loudspeaker-measurements&Itemid=153

Impedance magnitude drops low at the same time the phase angle is highly negative, making the speakers a demanding load.

 

[Beave]

I dont have any problems driving them its just that for two channel music my old arcam avr 250 sounds a lot better but the 20 year old Arcam lacked so many features like hdmi inputs, 4k atmos etc that I went for a newer Avr the Yamaha AVR 870 thats how come I ended up with two avrs and now I want to replace the old Arcam with a dedicated stereo Amp.

How *exactly* did you determine that your old Arcam sounds better for music? How did you set up the comparison?

 

[Beave]

They are also not good speakers though. Those speakers I not what I could live with. I'm pretty sure the crossover is in resonance given those numbers. If so that would stress any amp. A 2.7 ohm impedance with a - 65 degree phase angle would stress any amp anyway. The waterfall plot shows severe problems at crossover. You can tell the baffle step compensation is not well handled either. I have to say I remain baffled why these problems continue to surface in the speaker market place. This speaker is a simple two way for Heaven's sake. I would have thought to make that much of a dogs dinner of it would require work, but I suppose it was actually just severe laziness. It still just makes me scratch my head. With all the sophisticated design aids available now there is just no excuse for it.

I have a sneaking suspicion that marketing demanded that the Monitor Audio Gold 5G lineup has a two-way bookshelf model with the larger woofer. Engineering tried the best they could to fulfill the requirement, knowing all along it wasn't a good idea to mate the larger woofer with the tweeter used in this series of speakers.

 

[Beave]

Aren't the goofy speaker designs just to help sell bigger amps?

Makes for a good conspiracy theory!

 

[Beave]

Your experience with the A870 not sounding good with those speakers (which TLSGuy determined to have some difficult loads) may be well justified!
I think it safe to presume that the A870 is the same as the amp section of the A860, which Gene determined to be an exceptionally weak amp and also having marginal pre-amp outputs!
Here is a link to his review and a quote of the relevant comments on the shortcomings of this Yamaha AVR:

Yamaha RX-A860 AVENTAGE 7.2 Atmos/DTS:X A/V Receiver Review

The Yamaha AVENTAGE RX-A860 7.2CH Atmos/DTS:X AV receiver is packed with excellent networking features but it does fall short on power delivery making our recommendation conditional based on usage.

www.audioholics.com

From the last page of this review: "Suggestions for Improvements"

For so many years now, it seems the AVR brands keep cutting corners to keep prices low while they add features. Smaller transformers, smaller bypass capacitors, wimpy heatsinks, and I've noticed even the chassis metal itself seems thinner than ever before on some recent AVRs.

I was looking at pictures online of the internals of some of the current-year model Yamaha receivers, and I noticed that the heatsinks on some were noticeably smaller than last year's models, as were the transformers.

But none of the companies have reduced their ability to inflate specs!

 

[smallboydanger]

How *exactly* did you determine that your old Arcam sounds better for music? How did you set up the comparison?

My ears and the ears of anyone who has had the chance to listen to the two

 

[Beave]

My ears and the ears of anyone who has had the chance to listen to the two

And I was guessing you used your feet, smartass.

Did you level match?

How did you switch back and forth between the two?

 

[TLS Guy]

My ears and the ears of anyone who has had the chance to listen to the two

I think you are someone who relies on subjective reviews to make your purchases. That is the road to unwise purchases and likely to result in poor buying decisions with wasted cash.

Years passed this really did not happen. Now the audio press is just awash in useless gibberish in equipment reviews.

Trying to find objective data about most gear on the market today is impossible. That way the back hander and expensive lunch can work wonders for a manufacturer, to say nothing of withholding advertising dollars. The mags love it as hiring staff or paying for proper rigorous testing costs money. So not spending it adds to the bottom line.

It is a jungle out there, so beware.

Never forget that what someone says in a review or on a blog about how a piece of equipment sounds is absolutely useless in guiding a purchase.

 

[smallboydanger]

I think you are someone who relies on subjective reviews to make your purchases. That is the road to unwise purchases and likely to result in poor buying decisions with wasted cash.

Years passed this really did not happen. Now the audio press is just awash in useless gibberish in equipment reviews.

Trying to find objective data about most gear on the market today is impossible. That way the back hander and expensive lunch can work wonders for a manufacturer, to say nothing of withholding advertising dollars. The mags love it as hiring staff or paying for proper rigorous testing costs money. So not spending it adds to the bottom line.

It is a jungle out there, so beware.

Never forget that what someone says in a review or on a blog about how a piece of equipment sounds is absolutely useless in guiding a purchase.

There might be truth in what you are saying all the same all the equipment I own I might have read reviews on them but I listened to them in store before purchasing.

 

[smallboydanger]

And I was guessing you used your feet, smartass.

Did you level match?

How did you switch back and forth between the two?

Beave Im still new to all this and not as advanced technically as some on here the Yamaha Avr gives me all the features I want but I still prefer my Arcams sound when Im listening to music.
I appreciate your help but I want to know if anyone has listened to the Arcam SA 20 on here