Yamaha A-S300 Integrated Amp and CD-S300 CD Player Preview

[admin]

There are two ways to think about the new S300 offerings from Yamaha - either a stepping stone into a high-end two-channel system or a second system for discerning consumers.The price is where Yamaha sold us on the new S300 offerings. At $379.95 for the A-S300 Integrated Amplifier and $349.95 for the CD-S300 CD player, we think a lot of people are going to be interested in at least one of these duo. These may be the go-to purchases for those looking for a second system or just want an new toy to play with but don't want to break the bank.

Discuss "Yamaha A-S300 Integrated Amp and CD-S300 CD Player Preview" here. Read the article.

 

[sofast1]

I suspect it sounds very nice(and functions) just like my R-S300 receiver, which has a msrp of $50 less. I don't get it either.

 

[j_garcia]

I suspect it sounds very nice(and functions) just like my R-S300 receiver, which has a msrp of $50 less. I don't get it either.

Integrated amps are analog only. No processing.

 

[anamorphic96]

But his receiver is analog only. If not mistaken. Or do tuners count as some sort of processing.

 

[j_garcia]

Hmmm. Looked at it and the back panel actually looks identical. Odd, but yes, Integrated amps also generally do not have FM tuners either, but for a stereo amp, the R-S300 does indeed not have any digital inputs as far as I can tell too, so that is a bit odd. Basically the only difference is the tuner, which is something I could live without myself.

 

[anamorphic96]

Hmmm. Looked at it and the back panel actually looks identical. Odd, but yes, Integrated amps also generally do not have FM tuners either, but for a stereo amp, the R-S300 does indeed not have any digital inputs as far as I can tell too, so that is a bit odd. Basically the only difference is the tuner, which is something I could live without myself.

They just seem to be revamps of the AX and RX stereo line that's been around for many years. The new CD player looks promising. Especially for the price.

 

[sofast1]

I have no use for the tuner, and if I could have bought my R-S300 for one dollar less without it I would have. I just find it curious that you have to pay more to delete it. BTW, I also have a RX-460 and there's no comparison. The R-S300 is substantially bigger and heavier. They share nothing. The only fault I've found with it is that the "sub out" is live all the time and not linked to either speaker A or B. That means when you're playing the speakers in room "B",the sub in room "A" will still be playing even though speaker "A" is switched off. Use the speaker level connections on the sub and the problem is solved(the amp/receiver does not have any bass management anyway). It would have been nice if there was a switch on the back assigning the sub out to either speaker A or B. Aside from that little glitch, it's a fine piece. I agree that it's great choice for a smaller 2 channel system for those that appreciate better sound quality(mine's in the bedroom). If it had pre-outs I could remove the word "smaller" from that sentence. Assuming the only difference is the tuner, I can definitely recommend the A-S300!

 

[anamorphic96]

Considering the AS-500 is less than 50.00 more, It seems to be the better deal in my book.

 

[sofast1]

I agree, but the R-S500 is $50 less than the A-S500. It's about the same price as the A-S300! I still don't get it. Why not buy the receiver, don't use the tuner and save $50? My guess is that they make a lot more receivers than integrated amps, so the cost per unit is lower. But, we're talking 2 channel stuff in a 5.1 world, so they probably don't make a lot of either(comparatively). Just seems strange to me to pay more and get less(when everything else is equal).

 

[anamorphic96]

I agree, but the R-S500 is $50 less than the A-S500. It's about the same price as the A-S300! I still don't get it. Why not buy the receiver, don't use the tuner and save $50? My guess is that they make a lot more receivers than integrated amps, so the cost per unit is lower. But, we're talking 2 channel stuff in a 5.1 world, so they probably don't make a lot of either(comparatively). Just seems strange to me to pay more and get less(when everything else is equal).

The AS-300 and AS-500 do put out ten more watts per channel as well as offering different switching for the A/B speaker switching. Possibly of higher quality. These are the two big things that stick out between the two.

 

[sofast1]

Speaker switching is the same on the receiver and integrated amp,remotes are identical. Only difference is 10 watts per channel. Very unlikely there's any difference in sound quality.

 

[billy p]

I agree, but the R-S500 is $50 less than the A-S500. It's about the same price as the A-S300! I still don't get it. Why not buy the receiver, don't use the tuner and save $50? My guess is that they make a lot more receivers than integrated amps, so the cost per unit is lower. But, we're talking 2 channel stuff in a 5.1 world, so they probably don't make a lot of either(comparatively). Just seems strange to me to pay more and get less(when everything else is equal).

Exactly what I did when comparing the RS-700 & AS-700 and for me the deal breaker was the AS unit didn't even have a sub out. They include one on this unit (AS-300) but the higher end & more expensive AS unit still don't have one...go figure....

 

[anamorphic96]

Speaker switching is the same on the receiver and integrated amp,remotes are identical. Only difference is 10 watts per channel. Very unlikely there's any difference in sound quality.

No the switching is different. The receivers offer remote based speaker switching where as the integrated amps do not. They both use different switches as well.

The remotes are different as well. They look the same but have different button layouts.

 

[sofast1]

So, for less money, the receiver offers a feature the more expensive amp doesn't.

 

[sofast1]

You're correct, the receiver has reliable electronic switching(also available on the remote,as you said) and the amp has the same manual switch as my 17 year old RX-350's input selector(broken now, but lasted 12 years-see attachment). The receiver also has a "dimmer" switch(on the remote) to dim the display to different brightness levels. This works even when not using the tuner, as the input,speaker selected and volume are always displayed. The amp also lacks this. I guess my question to Audioholics is why would they recommend anyone buy the A-S300 instead of the less expensive R-S300? It sure looks like the receivers are better values than the integrated amps to me.

 

[anamorphic96]

Audioholics is not recommending anything. It is just a preview of a new product.

 

[sofast1]

Read the conclusion.

 

[j_garcia]

I have no use for the tuner, and if I could have bought my R-S300 for one dollar less without it I would have. I just find it curious that you have to pay more to delete it. BTW, I also have a RX-460 and there's no comparison. The R-S300 is substantially bigger and heavier. They share nothing. The only fault I've found with it is that the "sub out" is live all the time and not linked to either speaker A or B. That means when you're playing the speakers in room "B",the sub in room "A" will still be playing even though speaker "A" is switched off. Use the speaker level connections on the sub and the problem is solved(the amp/receiver does not have any bass management anyway). It would have been nice if there was a switch on the back assigning the sub out to either speaker A or B. Aside from that little glitch, it's a fine piece. I agree that it's great choice for a smaller 2 channel system for those that appreciate better sound quality(mine's in the bedroom). If it had pre-outs I could remove the word "smaller" from that sentence. Assuming the only difference is the tuner, I can definitely recommend the A-S300!

That sub out being on isn't a "glitch", that is how all stereo receviers and integrated amps behave with the exception of only one that I know: the Outlaw RR2150 which has adjustable bass management.

 

[sofast1]

The R-S300 is the first 2 ch. piece I've bought in quite a while,I wasn't aware they were all like that. It's not a "glitch" if you're only using one pair of speakers(probably 98% of users). It is a "glitch" and has to be bypassed(unless you want to turn the sub off & on frequently) if you're using two pairs of speakers. Too bad, a simple switch would fix it. But admittedly, most people won't notice.The Outlaw Audio is a very fine receiver, a step up in performance and price. It wasn't in the "bedroom" budget. The R-S300 replaced a 17 year old RX-460. That's one of the things about quality 2 channel stuff I love-lasts a long time & doesn't get outdated!

 

[anamorphic96]

Read the conclusion.

I did. They like some features and price but there speculating, and never recommend it.

Besides the slightly higher prices are justified for the integrated amps. What this really comes down to is what is important to the buyer. Power or features. Features seem important to you.

It's just a trade off. 30.00 difference is not a big one and reasonable in my book for a little more power.