$300 200 Watt Wireless Stereo Amp Reviewed!

[gene]

It’s not often an inexpensive wireless audio system comes my way that impresses me with the high level of performance it provides. For $300 you get the 200 watt (100x2, 4 ohms) Dynasty ProAudio's WSA-5RP Wireless Amplifier which is a seriously affordable solution to power a pair of surround speakers wirelessly, or to bring to life a pair of passive speakers you may have lying around.

Read: Dynasty Audio Wireless Stereo Amp Review

 

[PENG]

It’s not often an inexpensive wireless audio system comes my way that impresses me with the high level of performance it provides. For $300 you get the 200 watt (100x2, 4 ohms) Dynasty ProAudio's WSA-5RP Wireless Amplifier which is a seriously affordable solution to power a pair of surround speakers wirelessly, or to bring to life a pair of passive speakers you may have lying around.

View attachment 67169

Read: Dynasty Audio Wireless Stereo Amp Review

Thank you very much for reviewing such an affordable amplifier. Your objective and subjective measurements reinforced the importance of recording quality, and loudspeakers in-room performance, even when used with very affordable amps.

I really like Adele's songs and her singing, but have never been impressed with the recording quality of her CDs, digital files, BR live concerts and vinyl albums, so I am going to try hard to see if I can buy the digital file version of the SACD you used for your subjective measurements. If I could not find it, then I will bite the bullet and buy the SACD.

 

[MrBoat]

The industry is just super determined to change home audio speak into 4 Ohm terms, and to that, I flip them the double bird. Each time one of these little pony amps comes on the scene with seemingly high initial claims, there I go, scrambling thru the specs so as not to get led down the path to disappointment, yet again.

Why? Because they know the whole world is going to yawn at the thought of yet another, barely 50 wpc stereo amp. I suppose it's fine in a world that is so concerned with our hearing that they even make our cell phones turn down the fooking volume when we dare to crank the damn thing for whatever reason (like recordings that are just inherently too quiet).

Impressive noise floor ratings mean nada if you have to drive the poor thing constantly near the limits of it's capabilities.

I'd rather buy the Yamaha R-N303 for about the same $

 

[TLS Guy]

The industry is just super determined to change home audio speak into 4 Ohm terms, and to that, I flip them the double bird. Each time one of these little pony amps comes on the scene with seemingly high initial claims, there I go, scrambling thru the specs so as not to get led down the path to disappointment, yet again.

Why? Because they know the whole world is going to yawn at the thought of yet another, barely 50 wpc stereo amp. I suppose it's fine in a world that is so concerned with our hearing that they even make our cell phones turn down the fooking volume when we dare to crank the damn thing for whatever reason (like recordings that are just inherently too quiet).

Impressive noise floor ratings mean nada if you have to drive the poor thing constantly near the limits of it's capabilities.

I'd rather buy the Yamaha R-N303 for about the same $

I think moving to 4 ohm designs is the way to go. Most speakers are nearer 4 ohms then 8. Worse many speakers are rated 8 ohm and are 4 ohm or less in reality.

So this is a move to higher current, but lower voltage output devices. This should increase reliability all the way round. This is a trend in the right direction. Receiver designers please take note.

 

[MrBoat]

I think moving to 4 ohm designs is the way to go. Most speakers are nearer 4 ohms then 8. Worse many speakers are rated 8 ohm and are 4 ohm or less in reality.

So this is a move to higher current, but lower voltage output devices. This should increase reliability all the way round. This is a trend in the right direction. Receiver designers please take note.

Yeah but, many full range home speakers are more like 6 Ohms than 4, and barely 50W into 8 Ohm rating, true, or otherwise, is not enough power. Especially when considering just how many of these speaker designs are mid 80s or less in sensitivity. This skirting 4 Ohm or less madness is more about squeezing too much bass out of tiny drivers and not much else and speaker motors that move way too much.

Regardless, no matter what miniscule portion of the market my cockeyed view represents, I have been underwhelmed by just about every one of these little amps that think they can, in all but casual listening, and I have a LOT of different speakers. Admit it, the physics of class D is not so efficient when asked to match power with A/B designs, dollar for dollar and Ohms Law takes the cake no matter what. Once you start getting up over 100 stable watts into 8Ohms, heat becomes an issue and so does value. It shouldn't be so, but what we have here is an industry trying to get more for less. Look what the real class D performers cost, compared to these glorified desktop amps.

Great for whoever likes it and doesn't need much in the way of headroom, but it's just not for me. I m merely voicing my take on these types of amps. For my needs, there is no bargain to be had with these.

 

[TLS Guy]

Yeah but, many full range home speakers are more like 6 Ohms than 4, and barely 50W into 8 Ohm rating, true, or otherwise, is not enough power. Especially when considering just how many of these speaker designs are mid 80s or less in sensitivity. This skirting 4 Ohm or less madness is more about squeezing too much bass out of tiny drivers and not much else and speaker motors that move way too much.

Regardless, no matter what miniscule portion of the market my cockeyed view represents, I have been underwhelmed by just about every one of these little amps that think they can, in all but casual listening, and I have a LOT of different speakers. Admit it, the physics of class D is not so efficient when asked to match power with A/B designs, dollar for dollar and Ohms Law takes the cake no matter what. Once you start getting up over 100 stable watts into 8Ohms, heat becomes an issue and so does value. It shouldn't be so, but what we have here is an industry trying to get more for less. Look what the real class D performers cost, compared to these glorified desktop amps.

Great for whoever likes it and doesn't need much in the way of headroom, but it's just not for me. I m merely voicing my take on these types of amps. For my needs, there is no bargain to be had with these.

I should have been more specific in my reasons for supporting 4 ohm loads. The difference in output between driving a four ohm and an eight ohm load is 3 db. For a 6 ohm load 1.5 db.

However for the current is a very different matter. So if the amp had an output of 100 watts at 8 ohms, it would try and push 200 watts into four ohm. So then the choice becomes a much more expensive amp, or one that blows up if a customer thinks he is driving an 8 ohm load when in fact he is driving a four or six ohm load.

So specifying power into a four ohm load makes far more sense, as it tells the purchaser what the current limitations are, whereas specifying into 8 ohms does not.
This is one of my major beefs about receivers and no four ohm spec. You know darn well they are sailing "close to the wind", and inviting excess failures.

 

[lovinthehd]

I should have been more specific in my reasons for supporting 4 ohm loads. The difference in output between driving a four ohm and an eight ohm load is 3 db. For a 6 ohm load 1.5 db.

However for the current is a very different matter. So if the amp had an output of 100 watts at 8 ohms, it would try and push 200 watts into four ohm. So then the choice becomes a much more expensive amp, or one that blows up if a customer thinks he is driving an 8 ohm load when in fact he is driving a four or six ohm load.

So specifying power into a four ohm load makes far more sense, as it tells the purchaser what the current limitations are, whereas specifying into 8 ohms does not.
This is one of my major beefs about receivers and no four ohm spec. You know darn well they are sailing "close to the wind", and inviting excess failures.

Then again the tradition has been to rate amps at 8 ohm particularly for spec comparison among various brands/offerings. I thought this article was about a 200 wpc (at 8 ohm at reasonable thd) amp myself at first glance, rather than a 100wpc at 4 ohm amp....

 

[TLS Guy]

Then again the tradition has been to rate amps at 8 ohm particularly for spec comparison among various brands/offerings. I thought this article was about a 200 wpc (at 8 ohm at reasonable thd) amp myself at first glance, rather than a 100wpc at 4 ohm amp....

Yes, but that 4 ohm spec is far more informative though, and tells you far more about the amp. The way receivers are specked tells you little about their power amps, except that they are likely prone to blow up connected to a lot of speakers especially really good speakers.

I say that, as it is virtually impossible to make a true 8 ohm speaker, that does not drop to four ohms in a good portion of the power band. The reason for that is that it makes it virtually impossible to properly correct for BSC with an 8 Ohm limitation, that is especially true if it is a large but also sensitive speaker.
Receiver specks in my view are actually bordering on the fraudulent, if not across that line.

Making four ohm power specks the rule, would be far more honest and informative. It would reveal what I have been saying about receiver power specs for all to see.

 

[lovinthehd]

Yes, but that 4 ohm spec is far more informative though, and tells you far more about the amp. The way receivers are specked tells you little about their power amps, except that they are likely prone to blow up connected to a lot of speakers especially really good speakers.

I say that, as it is virtually impossible to make a true 8 ohm speaker, that does not drop to four ohms in a good portion of the power band. The reason for that is that it makes it virtually impossible to properly correct for BSC with an 8 Ohm limitation, that is especially true if it is a large but also sensitive speaker.
Receiver specks in my view are actually bordering on the fraudulent, if not across that line.

Making four ohm power specks the rule, would be far more honest and informative. It would reveal what I have been saying about receiver power specs for all to see.

I'm not disagreeing. Wish more amps came with solid 4 and 2 ohm ratings like pro amps do. Would also alleviate much of the "current" nonsense many people throw around when there's little difference in that regard with so many designs....

 

[TLS Guy]

I'm not disagreeing. Wish more amps came with solid 4 and 2 ohm ratings like pro amps do. Would also alleviate much of the "current" nonsense many people throw around when there's little difference in that regard with so many designs....

I should extend my remarks. These 8 ohm specs are a hangover from the tube days. Tubes are voltage amplifying devices and transistors are current amplifying devices.
So the old specs are appropriate for voltage amplifiers, but a four ohm spec is much more appropriate for solid state amps, as it really tells you about its ability to provide current. So it reveals far more of what you need to know about how a given solid state will perform. It also gives you significant insight into its likely reliability.

 

[lovinthehd]

I should extend my remarks. These 8 ohm specs are a hangover from the tube days. Tubes are voltage amplifying devices and transistors are current amplifying devices.
So the old specs are appropriate for voltage amplifiers, but a four ohm spec is much more appropriate for solid state amps, as it really tells you about its ability to provide current. So it reveals far more of what you need to know about how a given solid state will perform. It also gives you significant insight into its likely reliability.

So many things audio reputation wise still carry over from the tubey stuff....

 

[Hobbit]

It’s not often an inexpensive wireless audio system comes my way that impresses me with the high level of performance it provides. For $300 you get the 200 watt (100x2, 4 ohms) Dynasty ProAudio's WSA-5RP Wireless Amplifier which is a seriously affordable solution to power a pair of surround speakers wirelessly, or to bring to life a pair of passive speakers you may have lying around.

View attachment 67169

Read: Dynasty Audio Wireless Stereo Amp Review

Thanks for the review! Years ago, I was looking for something similar and there really wasn't anything viable available. In this aspect I'm glad to see a product like this.

On their website it is specifically being marketed as a "wireless surround sound speaker kit." In that regard it really doesn't need to have a 12v trigger. It's supposed to be wireless from the main system after all. However, both units should have an input signal detect that turns it on or puts it in standby. Perhaps having the volume on the back will keep it from being bumped in this application? I like that it has a sub out.

IMO, the Wiim amp is a much better option for a remote system. I wish this was available when I put my bedroom system together.

 

[MrBoat]

I should have been more specific in my reasons for supporting 4 ohm loads. The difference in output between driving a four ohm and an eight ohm load is 3 db. For a 6 ohm load 1.5 db.

However for the current is a very different matter. So if the amp had an output of 100 watts at 8 ohms, it would try and push 200 watts into four ohm. So then the choice becomes a much more expensive amp, or one that blows up if a customer thinks he is driving an 8 ohm load when in fact he is driving a four or six ohm load.

So specifying power into a four ohm load makes far more sense, as it tells the purchaser what the current limitations are, whereas specifying into 8 ohms does not.
This is one of my major beefs about receivers and no four ohm spec. You know darn well they are sailing "close to the wind", and inviting excess failures.

You're more right than wrong, but there is no shortage of 4, or even 2 Ohm ratings in enough instances to not be hard to find even by accident, and for some time now.

I've been dabbling in this realm of power for a few years by now and I have been underwhelmed with these types that either fail to, or barely make their often exaggerated ratings.

Still, 8 Ohm speakers exist, and companies such as Yamaha still spec that way. I tend to trust industry standards from companies like Yamaha, over these import startups that are appearing all over the place. Many of which, are just rebadging the same tech that their counterparts are, or slightly rearranging the same to the same end.

8 Ohm amps have existed and lasted for decades. That spec should be up front with the rest. Not just throwing hundreds of watts up front like it's a big deal, when it barely amounts to 50 watts for 8 Ohms. No matter how you slice it, 50 watts/8Ohm for solid state is a wimpy amp, and not nearly as sensational as they are making these products seem, and therein lies my beef.

8Ohm was for home/mains equipment, 4 Ohm was for auto/12V. During the tube era, many speakers were 16 Ohm, another rating that has helped differentiate era, and even type. Most speakers these days are likely 4 Ohm, but there are enough that are 8. It's just much more profitable for these companies to build and ship what amount to 50 watt amps. Guess what would happen if they advertised the 8Ohm spec instead?

 

[TLS Guy]

You're more right than wrong, but there is no shortage of 4, or even 2 Ohm ratings in enough instances to not be hard to find even by accident, and for some time now.

I've been dabbling in this realm of power for a few years by now and I have been underwhelmed with these types that either fail to, or barely make their often exaggerated ratings.

Still, 8 Ohm speakers exist, and companies such as Yamaha still spec that way. I tend to trust industry standards from companies like Yamaha, over these import startups that are appearing all over the place. Many of which, are just rebadging the same tech that their counterparts are, or slightly rearranging the same to the same end.

8 Ohm amps have existed and lasted for decades. That spec should be up front with the rest. Not just throwing hundreds of watts up front like it's a big deal, when it barely amounts to 50 watts for 8 Ohms. No matter how you slice it, 50 watts/8Ohm for solid state is a wimpy amp, and not nearly as sensational as they are making these products seem, and therein lies my beef.

8Ohm was for home/mains equipment, 4 Ohm was for auto/12V. During the tube era, many speakers were 16 Ohm, another rating that has helped differentiate era, and even type. Most speakers these days are likely 4 Ohm, but there are enough that are 8. It's just much more profitable for these companies to build and ship what amount to 50 watt amps. Guess what would happen if they advertised the 8Ohm spec instead?

My point is that manufacturer can spec any impedance number they want. I have no idea whether those Yamaha speakers are 8 ohm or not. It is an absolutely meaningless number. What I do know is that these days speakers are much more likely than not to be 4 ohm speakers in the major power band. The reason is that most speakers now have narrow front profiles, to reduce diffraction aberrations. The result is that BSC kicks in at higher frequency point. In a passive speaker the only way to do this is to drop the impedance below that transition point, to draw more power from the receiver. This extra power comes from current and not voltage increase. Now heating in the power transistors increases by the square of the increased current and is not linear.

So the four ohm rating is far more representative of the true power output of the amp. So the power output of that amp is going to be far more representative of the power it will deliver to most speakers, no matter if the speaker manufactures say the impedance of their speaker is. If it states 8 ohm then then that is either stretching the truth or a poorly designed speaker.

This is my beef with speaker manufacturers not specifying a four ohm power rating. My reading of the spec, is that they are trying to hide from lousy amps. There in no other reason not to provide a 4 ohm power rating.

 

[MrBoat]

My point is that manufacturer can spec any impedance number they want. I have no idea whether those Yamaha speakers are 8 ohm or not. It is an absolutely meaningless number. What I do know is that these days speakers are much more likely than not to be 4 ohm speakers in the major power band. The reason is that most speakers now have narrow front profiles, to reduce diffraction aberrations. The result is that BSC kicks in at higher frequency point. In a passive speaker the only way to do this is to drop the impedance below that transition point, to draw more power from the receiver. This extra power comes from current and not voltage increase. Now heating in the power transistors increases by the square of the increased current and is not linear.

So the four ohm rating is far more representative of the true power output of the amp. So the power output of that amp is going to be far more representative of the power it will deliver to most speakers, no matter if the speaker manufactures say the impedance of their speaker is. If it states 8 ohm then then that is either stretching the truth or a poorly designed speaker.

This is my beef with speaker manufacturers not specifying a four ohm power rating. My reading of the spec, is that they are trying to hide from lousy amps. There in no other reason not to provide a 4 ohm power rating.

I was talking about Yamaha amplifiers. They typically give the 8Ohm rating up front. When they say 100W, it's typically 100WPC/8Ohm. From there, I know it's going to be enough power for most 4Ohm if the specific amp isn't 8Ohm only.

I have noticed some companies being a little loose with their #'s up front, too, such as, using the combined watts of both channels up front in the intro, again, making it seem more than it is. Upon reading further, more often than not, I discover it is yet just another 50 watt amp.

I notice that those mfg. who still go by the 8Ohm standard, typically have more robust and capable amps, that often perform higher than what they spec. Otherwise, all of this other playing with the #'s now makes me skeptical, and then disappointed that I had to waste 5 mins of my life just to discover yet another overhyped 50 watt amp that they try to bury under all but the proverbial kitchen sink's features. I tend to classify these shadowy arrangements of information to things like white van, mainstream media, click bait, and to whatever other slick traps advertisers tend to use now.

They're not really bargains. It's still going to cost a grand to get up into the audiophile power ranges of amplification. At that point, Class D, and whatever so-called technological efficiencies it brings, starts to get significantly watered down into it just being cheaper for the manufacturer. May as well just buy a decent class A/B amp/receiver.

 

[TLS Guy]

I was talking about Yamaha amplifiers. They typically give the 8Ohm rating up front. When they say 100W, it's typically 100WPC/8Ohm. From there, I know it's going to be enough power for most 4Ohm if the specific amp isn't 8Ohm only.

I have noticed some companies being a little loose with their #'s up front, too, such as, using the combined watts of both channels up front in the intro, again, making it seem more than it is. Upon reading further, more often than not, I discover it is yet just another 50 watt amp.

I notice that those mfg. who still go by the 8Ohm standard, typically have more robust and capable amps, that often perform higher than what they spec. Otherwise, all of this other playing with the #'s now makes me skeptical, and then disappointed that I had to waste 5 mins of my life just to discover yet another overhyped 50 watt amp that they try to bury under all but the proverbial kitchen sink's features. I tend to classify these shadowy arrangements of information to things like white van, mainstream media, click bait, and to whatever other slick traps advertisers tend to use now.

They're not really bargains. It's still going to cost a grand to get up into the audiophile power ranges of amplification. At that point, Class D, and whatever so-called technological efficiencies it brings, starts to get significantly watered down into it just being cheaper for the manufacturer. May as well just buy a decent class A/B amp/receiver.

To be fair, they are not claiming it is a high powered amp. It is designed mainly for surround speaker use connected via Wi-Fi. Having said that it would push closer to 100 watts per channel into most speakers. Speaker manufacturers are almost uniformly dishonest about their impedance specs. Most speakers are nearer 4 ohms than 8. They do this so customers are not put off buying their speakers as they are afraid they will blow their receivers.

The bottom line is that when the amp is connected to a 4 ohm speaker it won't go into protection and or blow the output stage.

A 4 ohm spec is much more useful and actually honest, as 8 specs are generally hiding a serious deficiency.

 

[TankTop5]

This is an interesting product but what’s missing is AVR compatibility for surround speakers. I think it would be nice if AVR’s had multi channel wireless options for connecting surrounds. Having a product similar to this with six channels that you could place in an attic the wire all of your height speaker to would be game changing for many people but AVR’s would need to support it first.

Apologies if this is a rabbit trail but is there a limit to the number of individual audio channels via Bluetooth based on currrent technology? I know WiFi would be much easier with much higher bandwidth. It would be amazing if you could buy 4 KEF LS50’s for sides and rears (for instance) but nobody has made this available yet.

 

[MrBoat]

To be fair, they are not claiming it is a high powered amp. It is designed mainly for surround speaker use connected via Wi-Fi. Having said that it would push closer to 100 watts per channel into most speakers. Speaker manufacturers are almost uniformly dishonest about their impedance specs. Most speakers are nearer 4 ohms than 8. They do this so customers are not put off buying their speakers as they are afraid they will blow their receivers.

The bottom line is that when the amp is connected to a 4 ohm speaker it won't go into protection and or blow the output stage.

A 4 ohm spec is much more useful and actually honest, as 8 specs are generally hiding a serious deficiency.

It's just not for me. I have to be more careful to make sure which numbers they are putting up front, is all. I have a few of these types of amps and they all suffer the same ill of struggling to make 50wpc/8 Ohm.

Just used to having more headroom than what these toys provide.

Slice it however you like to but they could not gain any excitement if they stated "48 WPC/8Ohms!" That's more to truth as to why they are using the 4 Ohm spec.

 

[Kingnoob]

It's just not for me. I have to be more careful to make sure which numbers they are putting up front, is all. I have a few of these types of amps and they all suffer the same ill of struggling to make 50wpc/8 Ohm.

Just used to having more headroom than what these toys provide.

Slice it however you like to but they could not gain any excitement if they stated "48 WPC/8Ohms!" That's more to truth as to why they are using the 4 Ohm spec.

My Insignia NS-STR514 claims 200W total power: 100W x 2 at 8 ohms, 40Hz - 20kHz frequency response for powerful sound. But no sub output, I’m skeptical all these cheap models have 200w

 

[MrBoat]

My Insignia NS-STR514 claims 200W total power: 100W x 2 at 8 ohms, 40Hz - 20kHz frequency response for powerful sound. But no sub output, I’m skeptical all these cheap models have 200w

Home audio was 8Ohm and auto was 4. If you time warp to audio now from the past, you might, at a glance, figure that technology surely has afforded leaps in affordable power.

Of course, many of these little speakers they are often paired with may only handle 50-60wrms. I imagine a certain amount of user stupid proofing needs to be figured in for part of this industry and I know many people would just rather play it safe and not overpower their speakers and would welcome these borderline, wimpy little things.

I should not complain. I have a lot of other options, many of which are better values than these budget things. I just have to realize I'm not the target market for them. It just pulls me in when I see hundreds of watts and then find out it's not the same kinds of "hundreds" I would get excited about.