<font color='#000000'>Hallelujah, we're having a dialog! These 'holics forums had been quiet lately.
If my post sounds like an ad for Yamaha then you are mistaken. In fact it is your post which indicates a vindictive attitude towards Yamaha.
I never said your posts
were Yamaha ads, I said they
sounded like Yamaha ads. I cannot be mistaken in that because that's how they sounded to me. As far as my post sounding vindictive towards Yamaha goes, maybe it did sound that way to you. Ah, the subjective nature of anything audio! In its defense, though, my post did say: "I don't mean to knock them [Yamaha] (I've owned their product in the past and liked it)." I meant that sincerely. I've used their receivers, cassette decks and CD players extensively and never had cause to complain. Their direct-drive turntables were utter dreck, but that's another story.
No way can you say that Adcom or NAD makes better amps, tall claims yes, better sounding amps, no way.
I never said they made better amps or even better sounding amps. I said that their amps "will outperform Yamaha amps both on the test bench and driving real-world speaker loads." That's based on the fact that their amps develop more current than Yamaha amps. Ditto for Levinson vs. the SET amp du jour. If the associated speakers, program material, and desired listening level don't preclude it, I can well imagine a given Yamaha amp sounding better than a given NAD or Adcom.
Yamaha is also versatile in a way compared to other musical instruments manufacturers is that they make a wide range of products from Grand Pianos, Drums, Saxophones Electric Guitars to highly sophisticated Disklavier electronic pianos.
Don't forget the motorcycles!
I have played Yamaha concert grands and think they're wonderful. A guitarist friend tells me their cheaper acoustic guitars are rather poorly made, but that doesn't seem like such a contradiction: big company, big range of products, variable quality from terrific to mediocre.
As a student I worked for a exclusive chain of audio stores in Brooklyn NY who only sold high end stuff like NAD, Altec Lansing, Advent Rotel, SONY, Onkyo Adcom and Yamaha seperates .
When was this? I certainly wouldn't consider Altec Lansing, Advent, Sony, or Onkyo high-end now or in recent years. Not even close. Rotel and Adcom represent the bottom of the high end.
In blind A-B testing most customers would end up choosing the Yamaha amp speaker or amp alone combo over the others.
In blind A-B testing, most customers would pick a Sanyo boombox over a pair of LS3/5a's. In such tests, exaggerated bass and/or treble tends to win (as does higher volume). Whatever its merits elsewhere, in the context of a store, level-matched blind A-B testing can be helpful in forming a quick impression of speakers, but it's hard to imagine it being a valid method for comparing amps. Indeed, high-end stores almost invariably aren't set up for blind testing.
Try an Yamaha in proper enviroment and then come back with an honest opinion.
Been there, done that, liked it (Yamaha receiver). Much cleaner and more detailed than the Pioneer it replaced. And the NAD that replaced the Yamaha was still cleaner and even more detailed. (Like yours, it broke. Fortunately, the 3-year warranty was still in effect.) The Rotel that eventually replaced the NAD is better still. And so on...the ugrade addiction remains.
In the end it is the sound that matters, not the specs and the ear wins over it all.
Amen and hallelujah, in the words of the immortal Paul Simon. By the way, I'm not a Krell fan either. I think perhaps we agree at least as much as we disagree. It's just that almost every time anyone wants buying advice, the word "Yamaha" pops up like the dog in the old Snausages commercials. We need fresh voices in here...or at least a little healthy controversy
</font>
