Yamaha R-N2000A Bench Test Results!

[gene]

A Sony 790 for 3 benjamins + tax will achieve close to the same results. As stated by Gene ( most modern AVR no issue with slew rate>gain high=loud) AKA receiver/two.

That's a completely ridiculous statement. That Sony AVR has very weak current drive and would fall on its face driving a pair of low sensitivity 4 ohm speakers tuned for low bass. The Sony is fine for what it is, but it's like saying a Hyundai Sonata will drive just as good as a BMW M340i. Both cars will get you from A to B but with a much different driving experience.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I spent half a day comparing the R-N1000A and the R-N2000A using a pair of Arendal 1528 Bookshelf 8 speakers. While I level-matched the units, the comparison was not instantaneous—I know the skeptics will crucify me for this. However, there are notable audible differences between the two units, especially regarding the noise floor. To my surprise, I expected both units to sound identical, but they didn’t.

Even if we did a double-blind experiment with 1,000 people, if all 1,000 people were skeptics who believed everything sounded the same BEFORE the experiment and didn’t tell anyone how they truly felt, would this double-blind experiment be unbiased?

I think the real question is, is the improvement worth the money? And this can only be answered by the person buying the components.

 

[PENG]

I spent half a day comparing the R-N1000A and the R-N2000A using a pair of Arendal 1528 Bookshelf 8 speakers. While I level-matched the units, the comparison was not instantaneous—I know the skeptics will crucify me for this. However, there are notable audible differences between the two units, especially regarding the noise floor. To my surprise, I expected both units to sound identical, but they didn’t.

The R-N1000A had no trouble driving those power-hungry Arendals, which I was pleased to see. That said, the bass response between the two units is noticeably different, and I’ll expand on this in my updated review.

I am sure some are, but me, I am not a skeptic at all when it comes to noise floor, and audible difference when relatively hard to drive speakers are used with amps not truly rated for less than 200 W into 4 ohms.

The R-N2000A appears to have a much stronger power supply, and the DAC IC's used is the ES9026Pro that has significantly better SINAD than the N1000A, though I believe that alone cannot explain the "notable" differences heard. Noise is much easier to hear, I know I could pick that up very easily, for example I had units such as the Marantz AV8801, AV7005, AVR-4308CI (better) that gave me audible hiss at volume >around -10 whereas my Denon AVR-X4400H, Anthem AVM70 did not have such hiss even at volume 0. You have much more knowledge and experience than me on such topics, so I am just stating the obvious.

My first question is, has James or yourself measured those speakers yet? If so, I assume you will include the curves in the follow up review.

As to sound signature, yes I am always skeptical if the reviewers did not detail their AB comparison methods such as SBT, DBT, sighted but everything matched, and were the devices driven to well below, such as not more than 1/3 of their rated output levels. Anyway, I can't wait for expanded review, for now you have only mentioned the bass response differences.

On the amp "power" vs speaker demand side, I think it is important to not drive the DUTs pass their 1/3 or less rated limit because depending on the contents there may be very high peaks, and the speakers may have impedance dips below 4 or even 3 ohms at frequencies affected, based on the contents used.

In terms of specs, I just noticed that those flagship class bookshelf speakers use 8" bass drivers and the recommended amp power is "up to 500W"! That, combined with 84 dB/2.83V/m sensitivity, the notable differences in bass responses might not be difficult to explain especially if you have the impedance/phase angle curves.

Any such explanation could, and I would say should, be tested/verified by using contents that are less challenging in the bass responses, such as simply Diana Krall jazz etc and see if the differences would more or less disappear lol...

 

[PENG]

I spent half a day comparing the R-N1000A and the R-N2000A using a pair of Arendal 1528 Bookshelf 8 speakers. While I level-matched the units, the comparison was not instantaneous—I know the skeptics will crucify me for this.

I doubt anyone who would do that not even from the truly all amp sounds the same group, because you never said the differences were night and day, lol..

 

[mtrycrafts]

You would huh?! Lol. Chef's hat! and got nerve to hold up a fork! Lol. ...

He is ready to eat after cooking.

 

[gene]

Even if we did a double-blind experiment with 1,000 people, if all 1,000 people were skeptics who believed everything sounded the same BEFORE the experiment and didn’t tell anyone how they truly felt, would this double-blind experiment be unbiased?

I think the real question is, is the improvement worth the money? And this can only be answered by the person buying the components.

Agreed. Aesthetically the 2000 is way nicer than the 1000 and is a statement piece. IF you like posh things, I'd say the extra price is justified. Objectively speaking, the price increase isn't justifiable. Audibility-wise, it really depends how fanatical you are about sound and how tough a load your speakers are.

 

[gene]

I am sure some are, but me, I am not a skeptic at all when it comes to noise floor, and audible difference when relatively hard to drive speakers are used with amps not truly rated for less than 200 W into 4 ohms.

The R-N2000A appears to have a much stronger power supply, and the DAC IC's used is the ES9026Pro that has significantly better SINAD than the N1000A, though I believe that alone cannot explain the "notable" differences heard. Noise is much easier to hear, I know I could pick that up very easily, for example I had units such as the Marantz AV8801, AV7005, AVR-4308CI (better) that gave me audible hiss at volume >around -10 whereas my Denon AVR-X4400H, Anthem AVM70 did not have such hiss even at volume 0. You have much more knowledge and experience than me on such topics, so I am just stating the obvious.

My first question is, has James or yourself measured those speakers yet? If so, I assume you will include the curves in the follow up review.

As to sound signature, yes I am always skeptical if the reviewers did not detail their AB comparison methods such as SBT, DBT, sighted but everything matched, and were the devices driven to well below, such as not more than 1/3 of their rated output levels. Anyway, I can't wait for expanded review, for now you have only mentioned the bass response differences.

On the amp "power" vs speaker demand side, I think it is important to not drive the DUTs pass their 1/3 or less rated limit because depending on the contents there may be very high peaks, and the speakers may have impedance dips below 4 or even 3 ohms at frequencies affected, based on the contents used.

In terms of specs, I just noticed that those flagship class bookshelf speakers use 8" bass drivers and the recommended amp power is "up to 500W"! That, combined with 84 dB/2.83V/m sensitivity, the notable differences in bass responses might not be difficult to explain especially if you have the impedance/phase angle curves.

Any such explanation could, and I would say should, be tested/verified by using contents that are less challenging in the bass responses, such as simply Diana Krall jazz etc and see if the differences would more or less disappear lol...

All good points and yes the R-N2000A has an extremely stable power supply. It behaves like it's regulated minus the inefficiencies associated with regulating a linear power supply.

Yes I will be posting measurements, including the impedance of the 1528 bookshelf. I really hope Arendal lets me hold on to these speakers for a while bc they really reveal differences in amplification that my Revel F328be do NOT!

I think the noise floor differences I'm hearing is related to the DAC implementation. Before I declare this with 100% certainty, I plan on testing the analog paths of both units via my Denon SACD player. If I don't hear a difference in noise floor in that scenario, then we know it's related to the digital front end more than the analog.

 

[dlaloum]

All good points and yes the R-N2000A has an extremely stable power supply. It behaves like it's regulated minus the inefficiencies associated with regulating a linear power supply.

Yes I will be posting measurements, including the impedance of the 1528 bookshelf. I really hope Arendal lets me hold on to these speakers for a while bc they really reveal differences in amplification that my Revel F328be do NOT!

I think the noise floor differences I'm hearing is related to the DAC implementation. Before I declare this with 100% certainty, I plan on testing the analog paths of both units via my Denon SACD player. If I don't hear a difference in noise floor in that scenario, then we know it's related to the digital front end more than the analog.

Are the differences in amplification shown up because the 1528 is a tougher load to drive? Or is there something else that causes them to be a good identified of (certain?) amplifier differences?

My own experience, is that all amps sound alike on easy to drive speakers (where the amps are all running within their designed performance envelope) - and the amps start to sound different when they are driving speakers that require a far wider performance envelope: eg: Higher current requirements / low impedances, Capacitive tweeters with reducing impedance as frequency rises etc...

Hence those people wedded to "easy" speakers are likely to find that "all amps sound alike.... and those of us who found themselves beguiled by various alternative designs (ESL's, specific tweeter designs, etc...) have long advocated that there are differences in "amp sound". (which may more correctly be characterised as different forms of misbehaviour when driven outside their design performance envelope?)

 

[Tankini]

A Sony 790 for 3 benjamins + tax will achieve close to the same results. As stated by Gene ( most modern AVR no issue with slew rate>gain high=loud) AKA receiver/two.

Well Gene, I did state in my first comment to youI just know nothing (Jon Show). I'll take your (Dump) Hammer as a badge of Honor! Gene, you don't gave those out lightly, and/or many of them. No! in No way will a cheap a$$ Sony two channel or any cheap AVR compete with the flavor of that Yamaha you tested. My comment, meant for one on shoestring budget. Hey, it'll get one's foot in the door cheap Sony, Yamma, Denon, Onkyo. for Hi-fi. After all, your website is about. Thank you Sir for noticing my really Dump comment!! Great smile Gene, wearing that chef's hat and fork your holding! I Slowly walks away whistling.

 

[Tankini]

That's a completely ridiculous statement. That Sony AVR has very weak current drive and would fall on its face driving a pair of low sensitivity 4 ohm speakers tuned for low bass. The Sony is fine for what it is, but it's like saying a Hyundai Sonata will drive just as good as a BMW M340i. Both cars will get you from A to B but with a much different driving experience.

!! OMG! I just read your follow up on my comment of a cheap Sony AVR. For sure they'll both get one's ears tingling. One will be nice to play with, the other will put a Big smile on one's face with an OMG statement.
Now you understand why I stated you looked Great in your video presentation with your chef's hat and fork?! I caught the analogy, of you wearing that chef hat and fork you're holding. True in audio: AH!!!!

 

[Tankini]

He is ready to eat after cooking.

Thank you! At least someone on AH, knows I'm jacking around about Gene. I of all members, know better to Poke a Bear!
Who on AH, any members? any? would like to have a sit in when Gene runs through all of the tests done on any audio amps/receivers/AVR?.

 

[gene]

Are the differences in amplification shown up because the 1528 is a tougher load to drive? Or is there something else that causes them to be a good identified of (certain?) amplifier differences?

My own experience, is that all amps sound alike on easy to drive speakers (where the amps are all running within their designed performance envelope) - and the amps start to sound different when they are driving speakers that require a far wider performance envelope: eg: Higher current requirements / low impedances, Capacitive tweeters with reducing impedance as frequency rises etc...

Hence those people wedded to "easy" speakers are likely to find that "all amps sound alike.... and those of us who found themselves beguiled by various alternative designs (ESL's, specific tweeter designs, etc...) have long advocated that there are differences in "amp sound". (which may more correctly be characterised as different forms of misbehaviour when driven outside their design performance envelope?)

The Arendal 1528s are tuned very low for a bookshelf (22Hz) so they also have low sensitivity at 84.5dB (1/m). They are a 4 ohm speaker with dips in the 3 range at bass frequencies so you need a stout amp for them to be sure.

I think the bass is tighter or more controlled with the 2000 over the 1000 but this is my experience and it's not rigorously controlled comparison.

I definitely hear a difference in amps on the Arendals but not as much on my Revels which are a much easier load to drive, higher sensitivity (92dB/1m) and higher tuning.

 

[gene]

Thank you! At least someone on AH, knows I'm jacking around about Gene. I of all members, know better to Poke a Bear!
Who on AH, any members? any? would like to have a sit in when Gene runs through all of the tests done on any audio amps/receivers/AVR?.

I'm actually thinking about recruiting a local college engineering student to teach them the ropes and help me test amplifiers. We will see.