What Would be the Sonic Signature Differences Between These?

[PearlcorderS701]

As you all well know, I am kicking myself for not getting that A-9555 digital integrated from Onkyo -- instead being able to afford the TX-8555 stereo receiver (which has been faultless so far, and I totally appreciate Anamorphic's suggestion for this rock-solid unit). But, I'm wondering (if I could somehow manage to sell the 8555 and scrape up some dough for the 9555) just what kind of sonic differences would there be between these units?

The 9555:

http://www.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=A-9555&class=Amplifier&p=i


The 8555:

http://www.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=TX-8555&class=Receiver&p=i

...what would the sonic "benefit" if any be by moving up to the 9555 from the 8555? Depending on where you look online, the 9555's power is anywhere from 85 to 100 watts X 2, while the 8555's is a solid 100 X 2 -- so I'm not sure how much more "punch" the amp would give, but dynamically, I like the fact that there are no video inputs of any kind on the integrated (suggestings its musical pedigree and seriousness) as opposed to the video-centric flavor of my 8555 (a "DVD" input as well as other video tweaks) as this is powering a music-only two-channel setup. Aditionally, the blue LED glow from the 9555's volume knob indicator is way cool versus the traditional LED readout on the front of the 8555's display.

Still, what concerns me the most is what the sonic signature difference would be between these two units -- what would I expect if I switched out the 8555 for a 9555? Would the digital implementation yield a "warmer, tube-like" sound? Would there be a tremendous sonic difference between the two?

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Well, it looks like I found some insight with regard to my 8555 vs. 9555 question...

"I have the Onkyo 9555 and have compared it to a few sub 500$ offerings like NAD and Cambrdige and it came out on top for me for its smooth presentation and sheer control.

First things first. There are no pre outs whatsoever, I dont know what the other guy is seeing but the 9555 does not have PRE AMP out or SUB out. Only Speaker A and Speaker B and A+B. So if you must use a sub, you need to go speaker level.

Secondly, the Onkyo 8 series line are receivers (I had one before) and are lower end consumer level amps and the 9555 is a significant step up. The 8 series is probably the best 200$ receiver money can buy along with the HK ones, but the 9555 is an integrated amp with some very focussed engineering designed to compete with 500-800$ integrateds from the big boys.

Also, I havent heard the Music Hall but would once again give my highest recommendation for the Onkyo as it is one of the best decisions I made and I am not feeling the compulsion to upgrade my amp anymore since I got it."

I clipped this response from another site I stumbled on when researching this comparison of these two; seems this guy was most passionate about the 9555 definitely being in a different league altogether...

 

[TLS Guy]

Well, it looks like I found some insight with regard to my 8555 vs. 9555 question...

"I have the Onkyo 9555 and have compared it to a few sub 500$ offerings like NAD and Cambrdige and it came out on top for me for its smooth presentation and sheer control.

First things first. There are no pre outs whatsoever, I dont know what the other guy is seeing but the 9555 does not have PRE AMP out or SUB out. Only Speaker A and Speaker B and A+B. So if you must use a sub, you need to go speaker level.

Secondly, the Onkyo 8 series line are receivers (I had one before) and are lower end consumer level amps and the 9555 is a significant step up. The 8 series is probably the best 200$ receiver money can buy along with the HK ones, but the 9555 is an integrated amp with some very focussed engineering designed to compete with 500-800$ integrateds from the big boys.

Also, I havent heard the Music Hall but would once again give my highest recommendation for the Onkyo as it is one of the best decisions I made and I am not feeling the compulsion to upgrade my amp anymore since I got it."

I clipped this response from another site I stumbled on when researching this comparison of these two; seems this guy was most passionate about the 9555 definitely being in a different league altogether...

I think you correctly answered your own question.

Your receiver is the better bet. The 9555 uses a class D switching amp, similar to what is found in subs. However the unit does not appear to use a switching power supply and has a better conventional power supply.

The more expensive amp is probably around 45 watts per channel. Dynamic power is really bogus. The max power draw of that 9555 is only 110 watts. Now class D amps are efficient and approach 90%. But you can see it is not very powerful. I have been listening the "The Voice of Jupiter" (the RAH organ) from the Proms courtesy of the BBC this evening, and I think I would have run it out of gas pretty quickly on the deep sustained pedals.

Class D amps are known for a lot of problems.

Frequency response varying with the impedance curve of the speaker. Noise. Frequency response just about making it to 20 kHz and then falling rapidly. High frequency ringing. Not meeting their distortion specs with falling impedance.

Probably the best class D amps are made by Hypex, and sold on an OEM basis to a variety of manufacturers.

Here is their 100 watt module the UcD 100EM"]100 watt class D module the UcD100EM.[/URL]

Here are John Atkinson's measurements of an amp that uses that module.

That module has been used extensively in Europe in active loudspeakers. In this application class D makes a lot of sense, and they perform much better when not having to contend with a passive crossover.

Your other issue is that the sonic signature of most speakers is so dominant, that the sonic effects of even relatively poor amps will be obscured by the sonic signature of speakers stomping over everything.

So if you are itchy for an upgrade put your money into speakers. That is always the best advice.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Anyone else?

 

[lsiberian]

For a stereo setup I'd look at an HK myself. The Home theater receivers have their issues, but a good reliable amp section isn't one of them.

You probably couldn't tell the difference in a double blind test, but if you must choose I'd go with the Class AB design.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

For a stereo setup I'd look at an HK myself. The Home theater receivers have their issues, but a good reliable amp section isn't one of them.

You probably couldn't tell the difference in a double blind test, but if you must choose I'd go with the Class AB design.

Thanks for your opinion, 'lsi...however, if I do this "upgrade switch," it would be to the A-9555 (not to an H/K), so I wanted to compare the sonic signature differences between it and the 8555...

When you mention you'd go with the "Class AB design," are you referring to the A-9555's digital path or the 8555's configuration?

 

[TLS Guy]

I think you correctly answered your own question.

Your receiver is the better bet. The 9555 uses a class D switching amp, similar to what is found in subs. However the unit does not appear to use a switching power supply and has a better conventional power supply.

The more expensive amp is probably around 45 watts per channel. Dynamic power is really bogus. The max power draw of that 9555 is only 110 watts. Now class D amps are efficient and approach 90%. But you can see it is not very powerful. I have been listening the "The Voice of Jupiter" (the RAH organ) from the Proms courtesy of the BBC this evening, and I think I would have run it out of gas pretty quickly on the deep sustained pedals.

Class D amps are known for a lot of problems.

Frequency response varying with the impedance curve of the speaker. Noise. Frequency response just about making it to 20 kHz and then falling rapidly. High frequency ringing. Not meeting their distortion specs with falling impedance.

Probably the best class D amps are made by Hypex, and sold on an OEM basis to a variety of manufacturers.

Here is their 100 watt module the UcD 100EM"]100 watt class D module the UcD100EM.[/URL]

Here are John Atkinson's measurements of an amp that uses that module.

That module has been used extensively in Europe in active loudspeakers. In this application class D makes a lot of sense, and they perform much better when not having to contend with a passive crossover.

Your other issue is that the sonic signature of most speakers is so dominant, that the sonic effects of even relatively poor amps will be obscured by the sonic signature of speakers stomping over everything.

So if you are itchy for an upgrade put your money into speakers. That is always the best advice.

Last night I screwed up the Hypex UcD 100 link. Apologies to all.

 

[anamorphic96]

I second TLS Guy's suggestion of focusing on speakers.

What ever difference in sound quality your here between the amps will be minimal at best. Even then I doubt it. Especially if the test is properly conducted.

A new set of speakers will give you the biggest change.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

I second TLS Guy's suggestion of focusing on speakers.

What ever difference in sound quality your here between the amps will be minimal at best. Even then I doubt it. Especially if the test is properly conducted.

A new set of speakers will give you the biggest change.

Thanks, Anamorphic! I was hoping you'd chime in as you were the one who recommended the awesome 8555 to me in the first place.

Thanks for putting my mind at ease about this.

 

[PENG]

Looking at those specs, if you are driving those big RTi12 you should be better off with the 8555. I think the RTi12 can suck up a lot of current in a hurry.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Looking at those specs, if you are driving those big RTi12 you should be better off with the 8555. I think the RTi12 can suck up a lot of current in a hurry.

PENG,

The RTi12's are running in my home theater system, powered by a TX-SR605. The TX-8555 is powering my two-channel system separately in a different room, feeding two R20 bookshelves...

 

[PENG]

PENG,

The RTi12's are running in my home theater system, powered by a TX-SR605. The TX-8555 is powering my two-channel system separately in a different room, feeding two R20 bookshelves...

Well then you have more than enough power on hand. Instead of thinking about amps, why not just be happy with what you have now and start looking for a pair of LSi7.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Well then you have more than enough power on hand. Instead of thinking about amps, why not just be happy with what you have now and start looking for a pair of LSi7.

Actually, I could use some additional wattage and ampage for those 12s in the HT, but that's a conversation for another day...

It's not that I am not happy with the TX-8555, as I surely am, but I do not know if you can recall a previous very long thread of mine in which I asked for advice on an integrated amp or stereo receiver -- in that thread, I was kind of drooling over the A-9555 integrated as it seemed it had everything I needed in a 2-channel setup, but I simply couldn't find an affordable price on it anywhere. I was just wondering what the sonic differences would be between the digital pathed A-9555 and the TX-8555 IF I were to switch out the 8555 for the 9555...just curious what the sound differences would be between them, not that there is something wrong with my 8555 at all.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Sonic differences?

One is more chocolaty, and the other one is more minty.

I don't think there is ANY audio sonic differences between the two unless one is defective.

You have UPGRADITIS.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Sonic differences?

One is more chocolaty, and the other one is more minty.

I don't think there is ANY audio sonic differences between the two unless one is defective.

You have UPGRADITIS.

Hahahahahhaa...not yet, AcuDef! Upgraditis is still burning for my HT though...

What I am wondering is how can a product like the A-9555 with Class D implementations sound no different from a purely analog product like the 8555? The guts are probably far from identical in these units -- why would they sound the same?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Hahahahahhaa...not yet, AcuDef! Upgraditis is still burning for my HT though...

What I am wondering is how can a product like the A-9555 with Class D implementations sound no different from a purely analog product like the 8555? The guts are probably far from identical in these units -- why would they sound the same?

Because people have done double-blinded tests to compare amps, and these people concluded that the amps don't have a sound of their own.

If the amps measure similar (FR, THD, SNR, Crosstalk, etc.), they will sound similar regardless of the amp technology (Class A, B, A/B, D, etc.).

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Gotcha.

 

[PENG]

Because people have done double-blinded tests to compare amps, and these people concluded that the amps don't have a sound of their own.

If the amps measure similar (FR, THD, SNR, Crosstalk, etc.), they will sound similar regardless of the amp technology (Class A, B, A/B, D, etc.).

Also because engineers design amps to amplify a signal linearly and faithfully. They do end up unintentionally distorting the signal but the distortions (harmonic, intermodulation etc.) are generally low enough to make it difficult for normal people to tell the difference. So regardless of the differences in their designs, as long as they share the same goal of achieving linear amplication within the audible frequency band and with low enough distortions and noise level, they should end up sounding the same to you. Modern technology allows amp manufacturers to achieve such objectives at relatively low cost, making it possible for a $1000 amp to sound the same as a $5000 one in a properly controlled comparison tests that ensure the amps being compared are use within their optimal operating range/conditions. The same can be said of CD, DVD, BD players but not loudspeakers. It is still pretty hard to find a $1,000 speaker that sounds the same as a $5,000 one.

If you use a spectrum analyzer to analyze the output you will see the differences. Some birds and animals could probably hear some of tjhe differences but not normal people. There are those who possess the so called golden ears, or gifted people (such as TLS Guy) who has the ability to tell those minute differences. It is a self proclaimed sort of thing, and you can choose to believe them or not but you cannot prove it either way. To some of them the difference between amps are often described as 'day and night', 'huge', 'no comparison', 'jaw dropping' etc.

You may be one of those people but you will have to find out for yourself.