Yamaha A-S1000 vs A-S700 vs R-S700

[GO-NAD!]

What gives with three components?

The R-S700 includes the AM/FM Tuner, iPod input, Bluetooth, Pre-Out/Main In and Zone 2, while the A-S700 doesn't have any of these features. The amp sections for the A-S700 and R-S700 look to be identical, when you look at the power output as stated in the published specs, yet the A-S700 is more expensive.

Then there's the A-S1000, which is much more expensive than the others, weighs about twice as much, yet appears to have less power than them. Are they deliberately rating its output much more conservatively than the others, or are they exaggerating their output?

I haven't seen any published test of any of them, so I'm curious as to how their amp sections really compare.

 

[Adam]

Are you wondering why a company would sell three different products? Shocking, isn't it?

I just spent a a bit more time looking at them than I probably should have. To me, the A-S1000 chassis alone is in a different league, and it has been mentioned in articles here on AH. The R700 and A700 aren't clear to me, as the specs in the manuals actually make the R700 (for the most part) look better. And it has more features, like you said. I don't know. Luckily, I'm not shopping for one of them.

 

[Swerd]

I briefly had my hands on a Yamaha A-S700 integrated amp about a year and a half ago.

Shortly before the Great Speaker exchange of January 2013, when KEW and Alex arrived at my house to acquire/exchange various speakers, KEW also bought a used A-S700 from someone not far from where I live. I picked it up a few weeks earlier and tried it for a day or two.

I thought it was good. It seemed at least as potent, and perhaps more powerful than a B&K ST 140 amp (rated at 105 wpc at 8 ohms) I have. I was driving my small stand mount CAOW1 speakers. They are 8 ohm speakers with 85-86 dB sensitivity (?), similar to the Salk SongSurround I. They were a very easy load for the Yamaha to drive. There was nothing I disliked about it.

KEW wanted it for his new Philharmonic 3 speakers he was getting. As far as I know he uses it to drive them, happily. If I remember, the price for the used amp was about half of what it sells for on Amazon. And yes, it seems like the less expensive R-S700 receiver includes a radio tuner with what appears to be the same or very similar amp section.

I did find this review of the A-S700, which includes what appear to be detailed measurements of the amp section's power output.

http://www.avhub.com.au/images/stories/australian-hifi/reviews/2011-05_to_12/2011-07/yamaha_as-700_amplifier_review_lores.pdf

 

[3db]

I briefly had my hands on a Yamaha A-S700 integrated amp about a year and a half ago.

Shortly before the Great Speaker exchange of January 2013, when KEW and Alex arrived at my house to acquire/exchange various speakers, KEW also bought a used A-S700 from someone not far from where I live. I picked it up a few weeks earlier and tried it for a day or two.

I thought it was good. It seemed at least as potent, and perhaps more powerful than a B&K ST 140 amp (rated at 105 wpc at 8 ohms) I have. I was driving my small stand mount CAOW1 speakers. They are 8 ohm speakers with 85-86 dB sensitivity (?), similar to the Salk SongSurround I. They were a very easy load for the Yamaha to drive. There was nothing I disliked about it.

KEW wanted it for his new Philharmonic 3 speakers he was getting. As far as I know he uses it to drive them, happily. If I remember, the price for the used amp was about half of what it sells for on Amazon. And yes, it seems like the less expensive R-S700 receiver includes a radio tuner with what appears to be the same or very similar amp section.

I did find this review of the A-S700, which includes what appear to be detailed measurements of the amp section's power output.

http://www.avhub.com.au/images/stories/australian-hifi/reviews/2011-05_to_12/2011-07/yamaha_as-700_amplifier_review_lores.pdf

Looks like it has a respectable power supply/amp section.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Are you wondering why a company would sell three different products? Shocking, isn't it?

I just spent a a bit more time looking at them than I probably should have. To me, the A-S1000 chassis alone is in a different league, and it has been mentioned in articles here on AH. The R700 and A700 aren't clear to me, as the specs in the manuals actually make the R700 (for the most part) look better. And it has more features, like you said. I don't know. Luckily, I'm not shopping for one of them.

I wasn't seriously shopping either, but I do like to peruse different audio equipment every now and then - especially since one of my own components started acting up. (More on that later)

I realize the A-S1000 isn't quite the same as the others, but for the extra coin, I want to see more watts. I have to think that being twice the weight of the others, it probably has a more robust power supply, which I would've thought would offer at least more dynamic power than the others, but the published specs don't indicate that.

 

[GO-NAD!]

I briefly had my hands on a Yamaha A-S700 integrated amp about a year and a half ago.

Shortly before the Great Speaker exchange of January 2013, when KEW and Alex arrived at my house to acquire/exchange various speakers, KEW also bought a used A-S700 from someone not far from where I live. I picked it up a few weeks earlier and tried it for a day or two.

I thought it was good. It seemed at least as potent, and perhaps more powerful than a B&K ST 140 amp (rated at 105 wpc at 8 ohms) I have. I was driving my small stand mount CAOW1 speakers. They are 8 ohm speakers with 85-86 dB sensitivity (?), similar to the Salk SongSurround I. They were a very easy load for the Yamaha to drive. There was nothing I disliked about it.

KEW wanted it for his new Philharmonic 3 speakers he was getting. As far as I know he uses it to drive them, happily. If I remember, the price for the used amp was about half of what it sells for on Amazon. And yes, it seems like the less expensive R-S700 receiver includes a radio tuner with what appears to be the same or very similar amp section.

I did find this review of the A-S700, which includes what appear to be detailed measurements of the amp section's power output.

http://www.avhub.com.au/images/stories/australian-hifi/reviews/2011-05_to_12/2011-07/yamaha_as-700_amplifier_review_lores.pdf

That's a pretty detailed review. I never came across it during my searches, so thanks. I think if I was in the market for one of these amplifiers, I would need to see some more compelling info (such as Yamaha significantly understating the power) to convince me to go for the 1000 over one of the 700's.

 

[mike c]

the R means receiver, while the A means Amplifier.

i think Yamaha wishes to distinguish the A = Audiophile (lesser = better) from the R = mass market

i always found the yammy integrated amps to be overpriced (since i'm not golden eared).

but i keep looking at them because they look really nice.

 

[slipperybidness]

the R means receiver, while the A means Amplifier.

i think Yamaha wishes to distinguish the A = Audiophile (lesser = better) from the R = mass market

i always found the yammy integrated amps to be overpriced (since i'm not golden eared).

but i keep looking at them because they look really nice.

You know, the thing is that I have never been disappointed with any Yammy gear. They are a company that I trust that hasn't let me down yet. I think they are one of the safest bets for build quality, performance, and reliability on the market.

 

[GO-NAD!]

You know, the thing is that I have never been disappointed with any Yammy gear. They are a company that I trust that hasn't let me down yet. I think they are one of the safest bets for build quality, performance, and reliability on the market.

I'm inclined to agree with you. I've never had a hitch with my RX-V1800. But, I'm beginning to question whether the C372 was a wise choice.