Need Your opinion on a Yamaha amp

Are we allow to talk price? If so
What are they selling for:
mx1000
mx800
m80
m45
I don't want to pay to much, but a fair price
 
Last edited:
I think that's not allowed, but you can post a thread in this forum with your question:
http://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?forums/dollars-and-sense.128/

Which stereo speaker pair are you driving (fronts)?
Unless it's a really heavy load, I have a feeling you could get away with an M-60 pretty comfortably, and get the same sound as the M-80 (along with the switchable Class-A, APS secondary power supply, etc) for less cash. The bonus if you go that route is that it's a much cleaner/simpler amp inside and would be easier for a tech to once-over as well.

It's probably also worth looking out for the M-40 (for secondary / surround duties), it has more headroom / current drive ability than the M-45, and more importantly since it doesn't have the meters will likely cost less too. For those duties though just get whatever decent amp/s you find cheapest.

As a sidenote, the above doesn't apply to the M60/65 and M80/85 (those pairs are much the same to my knowledge).
 
Hi Zaibatsu,
I do not see an argument here about understanding circuit design/implementations between pure Class A, MX 1k or 10k.
Class A design not equal MX-1K sliding bias design and MX-1K sliding bias design not equal to MX-10k sliding bias design..Yes that is clear, never been in question, I read those articles..etc

Semantics, that is what this argument is about, so there you go:

The MX offers Class A LIKE performance.
Hope that clears out the air.

Same goes for M sounding the same with MX:

The M and MX have SIMILAR sound based on other accounts / opinions....Not mine, but yeah, I already mentioned that...

There, I amended my statements;)

wait...what?
I have a feeling you could get away with an M-60 pretty comfortably, and get the same sound as the M-80

:D



As far as heatsink mass, hmm, you mean surface area?..
The MX fleamsy fins do an excellent job at dissipating heat for a sliding bias design. You need surface area, Mass is secondary in importance.
The M heatsinks certainly have greater mass, and possibly larger surface areas as well, one would need to measure and calculate, but are they located within a sheet metal box that is prohibitive to air circulation to some extent. That might be suitable for some circuits but is it suited for continuing use in Class A?
... as are the massive heatsink and the design of the BX-1 monoblocks,.... since you mentioned them :biggrin:

Yeah, discussion for a different thread, but the BX-1s are moving heat incredibly well. After hours of use they were very comfortable to the touch. I have a suspicion that whomever had their units baking themselves to death, had them in a place with poor ventilation.

As far as research and development for the mx-10k, what is wrong with that? A true engineering company is expected to do that for a flagship product. I wish more companies did that and I trully wish Yamaha would start doing it again.
As a consumer, I would take that overengeneerring (if there is ever such a thing) over pseudo original designs thrown in a 1inch thick front plate aluminum box and sold for many times more than the MX 10k or other true engineering statements.

But, yeah good discussion.... Sorry for diverging off the subject of the thread.
 
Yeah, my point was only that there's generally audible benefits to a well designed Class-A stage over a sliding bias design, a sliding bias is used because it's cheaper to produce in most cases (as applied in most MX amps as well as the later AX series of integrateds, evident by smaller/lighter heatsinks), not because it sounds better. My other point was that the MX-10k uses a VERY different approach to most other sliding bias amps including Yamaha's own - so it's not really correct to say "HCA is a giant-killer in the MX-10k, therefore it is in everything else". I never said there was anything wrong with engineering either! I think the 10k is an amazing product and totally agree they should go back to that level of R&D, you're putting a lot of words in my mouth. :D

Agreed on the heat being trapped inside etc, but in my experience once you go over those amps thoroughly and don't leave them trapped in a cabinet, the vertical convection does a fine job of getting rid of the heat and thus they handle prolonged Class-A use just fine. Like you suggest, I think most problems only occur due to previous owners running them in Class-A without adequate ventilation (usually under other gear) which eventually takes its toll on solder joints and other things.

I'd love to hear what you think of the BX-1s compared to your B-1 / B-2s etc once you have a chance to AB them!
 
...they located within a sheet metal box that is prohibitive to air circulation to some extent. That might be suitable for some circuits but is it suited for continuing use in Class A?
... as are the massive heatsink and the design of the BX-1 monoblocks,.... since you mentioned them :biggrin:
...

In fairness though, the M-series class A dissipation is a fraction of the BX-1.
 
Yeah, my point was only that there's generally audible benefits to a well designed Class-A stage over a sliding bias design, a sliding bias is used because it's cheaper to produce in most cases (as applied in most MX amps as well as the later AX series of integrateds, evident by smaller/lighter heatsinks), not because it sounds better. My other point was that the MX-10k uses a VERY different approach to most other sliding bias amps including Yamaha's own - so it's not really correct to say "HCA is a giant-killer in the MX-10k, therefore it is in everything else". I never said there was anything wrong with engineering either! I think the 10k is an amazing product and totally agree they should go back to that level of R&D, you're putting a lot of words in my mouth. :D

Agreed on the heat being trapped inside etc, but in my experience once you go over those amps thoroughly and don't leave them trapped in a cabinet, the vertical convection does a fine job of getting rid of the heat and thus they handle prolonged Class-A use just fine. Like you suggest, I think most problems only occur due to previous owners running them in Class-A without adequate ventilation (usually under other gear) which eventually takes its toll on solder joints and other things.

I'd love to hear what you think of the BX-1s compared to your B-1 / B-2s etc once you have a chance to AB them!


cheaper to produce? why do you say that...because they used less aluminum on the heatsinks :rflmao:

you mentioned that the MX10 was not relevant as part of this subject/discussion because it is so much different than the MX1k implementation...why did you bring it up?

in terms of "sounds better" so which is it?
I don't think anyone is going to argue that a TOTL Class AB amp will likely sound better than a cheaper Class A one (with the inverse also being true). That's a straw man argument.
or
my point was only that there's generally audible benefits to a well designed Class-A stage over a sliding bias design, a sliding bias is used because it's cheaper to produce in most cases
but yes, I got your point, yet I can cling onto semantics as well...is not puting words in your mouth..it is semantics and that can keep this going on for a long time.

Now in all fairness,

If you had the chance to listen for a sufficient peirod of time to a restored MX-1000 and a restored M80/85 amps side by side, with the amp being the only variable, then I can appreciate your opinion, so please let me know it that is the case.

I have not had that opportumnity and I have based my opinion on what others have reported and that was that the amps sound similar ;)


As far as the BX-1, it is one of the finest amps I have ever heard, but I had not done a fair comparison with my B-1. Within 1/2 hr of use, I could have cooked eggs on my B-1...substantially hotter than the BX-1s were after hours of use. I had to put the B-1 away as it needs a full rebuild before something bad happens, but yeah, a good AB comparison will happen at some point, no doubt. I just not see it happening in the immediate future.

so now back to the subject of the thread
my argument is that if there is no audible distorsion of any kind in the MX (I certainly do not hear any), sound is similar according to other accounts, sliding bias is keeping heat under controll, there is no glue issue, more choices on the replacement parts, then the MX was my choice.....that was the reasoning behind my opinion.
Nothing wrong with the M85. The moment I ran across one that is in decent condition and fairly priced, I am snatching it. I just have not hunted for one actively as I did in the begining with the MX-1K.
 
You did make a comparison of the two though, so I felt compelled to clarify the relativity. :beerchug:

yes, yes, did mentioned but in response to this:

I'd be more worried about those beautiful BX-1s, they've a LOT more heat to dissipate!

not that I had really had the intention to compare the M with the BX-1s.....different animals

the relativity is that they are all able to put out awesome yamaha sound :rockon:
 
I meant no offence, and I certainly am yet to try a piece of Yamaha gear I didn't like.
I think it helps that they all strive for the same natural signature, unlike other brands which seem more varied over the years.

I'll politely shut up so I can hopefully have the pleasure of hearing your comparisons between the BX-1 / B-1 / B-2 one day. :)
I know people are reluctant to compare things here, but it helps deciding which beautiful machines would be the "best fit" for those of us who can't have them all.

I think the OP will be thrilled with any of the amps he's shortlisted.
 
The speakers I am running are Maggie 3.5 and MG10 and some Phase Tech PC33.
Maggie 3.5 require the most power and then the MG 10 and last the Phase Techs. Currently using the DSP-A1 and yes you can hear the strange on the amp with the Maggie 3.5 when you push it some. I have also thought about the McIntosh MC252 and MC152 for main and surround, but don't want to invest that kind of money. I do not want a amp that run HOT as it will help destroy itself over time. I do like the Yamaha's but want to chose the correct one.

Of course the more powerfull amp on Front and Center and then 4 channels of surround and Heights later on......
Music first and then Home Theater.

Thanks for everyone feedback. Keep it coming
 
Yeah you'll definitely want the extra grunt on the maggies, M-80 / MX-1000 will be the tickets for mains.
I'd make your choice depending on your preference with restoration. If you're happy to spend a bit extra and get the M-80 professionally restored I think it would be a better choice, but if you don't intend to do that then get the MX-1000 as it'll be less likely to need it. Personally I'd be going over either amp before using it.

These things are great value for money compared to something like a McIntosh and should still come in a lot cheaper after some tech time.
If the job is done right then they will happily run hot or cold for many years, just leave generous ventilation room around them and particularly on top of them (no stacking).

Good luck.
 
Just about to pull the trigger on MX800........but wait there is a great looking MX-1000u....Pulled the trigger on the MX-1000u instead.
 
Last edited:
I pulled the trigger on 2 of the MX1000u and thanks to rottalpha, avionics, & I believe arm2 for there help in doing a rebuild on both of these amps. I am replacing caps, trimmer, relays, and power transistors. Here are a few pictures but refer to http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/yamaha-mx1000.784094 as rottalpha has stated. Fixing to order the parts for the rebuild thanks to rottalpha for the parts list.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0245.JPG
    IMG_0245.JPG
    38.5 KB · Views: 23
  • IMG_0246.JPG
    IMG_0246.JPG
    50.1 KB · Views: 24
Back
Top Bottom