MX-2000 and NS-2000
- Thread starter lesterT
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Hi,
im using a MX-2000 poweramp and a B&W speaker, Im thinking to upgrade to NS-2000, but some of my friend said MX-2000 will not have enough power to drive NS-2000 (need MX-10000 or 101m).:sigh:
What do u guys think? i'd like to get some advice form yamaha users.
There full of chicken poop!
Last edited:
Silversleep
Super Member
:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:
Hi,
im using a MX-2000 poweramp and a B&W speaker, Im thinking to upgrade to NS-2000, but some of my friend said MX-2000 will not have enough power to drive NS-2000 (need MX-10000 or 101m).:sigh:
What do u guys think? i'd like to get some advice form yamaha users.
Your
friends are :screwy: You are good to go. :thmbsp:I don't know, I 'm new into hifi world but they are quite experienced.
I just think MX-2000 is the top 3 power amp in the yamaha history (MX-10000 and 101M is the top).
I don't understand how come yamaha will made their top amp cannot drive their own speaker....
I will change my B&W to NS-1000X first and keep looking for a good NS-2000
I just think MX-2000 is the top 3 power amp in the yamaha history (MX-10000 and 101M is the top).
I don't understand how come yamaha will made their top amp cannot drive their own speaker....
I will change my B&W to NS-1000X first and keep looking for a good NS-2000
samosui
Well-Known Member
I don't know, I 'm new into hifi world but they are quite experienced.
I just think MX-2000 is the top 3 power amp in the yamaha history (MX-10000 and 101M is the top).
I don't understand how come yamaha will made their top amp cannot drive their own speaker....
I will change my B&W to NS-1000X first and keep looking for a good NS-2000
Number of posts don't always reflect how 'experienced' someone is but I'd put my money on avionic and Brutal any day. And I agree, Yamaha wouldn't have made an amp like the MX-2000 not be able to drive the NS-2000 and it seems that you feel that way too.
For grins, when I first saw this post I looked up the specs for both the NS-1000 and the NS-2000 but I thought that I'd let the more "experienced" ones respond first. And they have.
My guess is that if you had the MX-2000 drive either a pair of NS-1k and the NS-2k they will, at the same volume setting, put out about the same volume (sound pressure) through either pair. The main difference I can tell from the specs is that as you turn up the power, the NS-2k will handle more power. So one can blow out the 1k before the 2k. But that's not what HiFi is about.
Thanks all for the responses,
I listened both speakers in my friends home,
I find that I like NS-2000 more, NS-1000X have too little bass and the look of NS-2000 is more wife friendly
As I cannot find a good NS-2000 in the market atm, my friend suggest me get a yamaha SW-1000 subwoofer to get more bass and its very huge ..
I listened both speakers in my friends home,
I find that I like NS-2000 more, NS-1000X have too little bass and the look of NS-2000 is more wife friendly
As I cannot find a good NS-2000 in the market atm, my friend suggest me get a yamaha SW-1000 subwoofer to get more bass and its very huge ..
You didn't say which B&W speaker you are using. But if they are something like 802D, then NS2000 should be better match for your amp. MX2000 is not particulary high current design, but you need a lot of current to drive B&W at bass region properly. They would be more comfortable with Bryston or Krell, than Yamaha. Older B&W, like Matrix series are more forgiving, but you probably get better treble from NS speakers.
JonVH
Active Member
You're bound to find people who will say that you need hundred of watts, but you have to really ask yourself how loud these people are listening, how loud you plan to listen, and how low your speaker dip...and most importantly, at what frequency.
If there is anything that I have come to learn over the years, its got to be that you can find anything for or against anything on the internet. People will say all kinds of things without having heard or owned the gear that they give suggestions on.
The NS-1000 and NS-2000 are over 90dB @ 1W anechoic and the Japanese (oh how I detest blanket statements) are not known to design difficult to drive speakers, at least in terms of the impedance magnitude. They were more well known for high impedance drivers that needed high voltage drive and gain, and where earlier tube amp efforts were de rigueur. With one watt musical signal to each speaker placed 3 feet from the wall with you sitting 10 feet away, the SPL of either of these speakers is over 85dB. That is loud for my ears, I have been there.
In fact, those with good hearing may find this is well into their pain threshold. Let us say that a headbanger is looking for more peak loudness and twirls the voltume knob over, pushing the meters into the 100W territory. The output should be over 100dB (106dB, specifically for drivers with low power compression)- in any case enough to cause permanent hearing damage. Let us pretend that the impedance was 1 ohm; at 100W we're down to 96dB, still enough to leave you with ringing ears and drown out any speech deep into the domain of unintelligable.
Lets assume a more difficult scenario and use a set of 82dB 1 ohm speakers. 100W will yield an output in this same room, at over 88dB. It is unlikely that anyone who values their hearing is going to listen even with minute peak transients in the 88dB range, and this is where the honest majority of speakers that reside in this impedance and efficiency range (electrostatics) max out in terms of SPLs, anyhow.
Some people want that live enough level or loudness, but its clearly not in the best interest of long term hearing.
The MX-2000 is a classic amp, but was built like few other of its day, I think that is apparent from any angle. In fact, it was a departure being built more like modern higher tier amps in recent years. I'm sure that you have had the chance to open yours, not very much like other 80's gear, is it? This one is the half-power version of the MX-10000, and both are stable into 1 ohms, in which scenario the MX-2000 can provide a bit over 600W per channel. Ask yourself how many speakers, real speakers that the magority of audiophiles own, actually dip this low? I can only think of Quad ESLs, Infinity Kappas and one specific model of Apogee ribbon that does. B&W worse impedance drops to 2.5 ohms, and that isn't even low to a Mosfet, which typically are used in brushless motor controllers to drive loads in the 0.005 ohm territory.
Depending on the version of this amp you have (there are a few different driver boards, the most obvious way to tell) the amp is a regulated design. What that means is that it is a high current amp and will double its output to the limit of the regulator with lower dropout than a typical capacitor bank alone can, and if I recall there is a bit over 21A current x2 in reserve, which is sufficent, if not excessive, for home audio reproduction. This was the method Bryston and many others used in their amps and gives full bass authority and drive even though it doesn't have the "peak power" ratings. This circuit type opposes voltage drop and keeps the voltage "stiff" and keeps current delivery linear. The end result is that it gives no sonic indication of "running out of gas" until the clip indicator comes on and you hear it. Unregulated designs or those that at least don't have some type of servo compensation will sound worse as the demand increases, and if there was any shred of truth to "bigger amps sounding better", it would apply to those taking rail voltage directly off the transformer secondaries' rectifier banks. Even then, I call bs on the usual claims as there is far more to an amp than just end current, with plenty of splendid-sounding low power amps standing testament to that. Bryston's actually began to output less power below 4 ohms and is why many brands or lines to this day do not state their low impedance tests. Chances are, you won't hear the difference.
I have a friend who has one of these amps and it doesn't show any sign of slowing down on any speaker he's tried, including B&W ( not sure what model). He ran his with a set of Quad stats and it was an ear opener.
If there is anything that I have come to learn over the years, its got to be that you can find anything for or against anything on the internet. People will say all kinds of things without having heard or owned the gear that they give suggestions on.
The NS-1000 and NS-2000 are over 90dB @ 1W anechoic and the Japanese (oh how I detest blanket statements) are not known to design difficult to drive speakers, at least in terms of the impedance magnitude. They were more well known for high impedance drivers that needed high voltage drive and gain, and where earlier tube amp efforts were de rigueur. With one watt musical signal to each speaker placed 3 feet from the wall with you sitting 10 feet away, the SPL of either of these speakers is over 85dB. That is loud for my ears, I have been there.
In fact, those with good hearing may find this is well into their pain threshold. Let us say that a headbanger is looking for more peak loudness and twirls the voltume knob over, pushing the meters into the 100W territory. The output should be over 100dB (106dB, specifically for drivers with low power compression)- in any case enough to cause permanent hearing damage. Let us pretend that the impedance was 1 ohm; at 100W we're down to 96dB, still enough to leave you with ringing ears and drown out any speech deep into the domain of unintelligable.
Lets assume a more difficult scenario and use a set of 82dB 1 ohm speakers. 100W will yield an output in this same room, at over 88dB. It is unlikely that anyone who values their hearing is going to listen even with minute peak transients in the 88dB range, and this is where the honest majority of speakers that reside in this impedance and efficiency range (electrostatics) max out in terms of SPLs, anyhow.
Some people want that live enough level or loudness, but its clearly not in the best interest of long term hearing.
The MX-2000 is a classic amp, but was built like few other of its day, I think that is apparent from any angle. In fact, it was a departure being built more like modern higher tier amps in recent years. I'm sure that you have had the chance to open yours, not very much like other 80's gear, is it? This one is the half-power version of the MX-10000, and both are stable into 1 ohms, in which scenario the MX-2000 can provide a bit over 600W per channel. Ask yourself how many speakers, real speakers that the magority of audiophiles own, actually dip this low? I can only think of Quad ESLs, Infinity Kappas and one specific model of Apogee ribbon that does. B&W worse impedance drops to 2.5 ohms, and that isn't even low to a Mosfet, which typically are used in brushless motor controllers to drive loads in the 0.005 ohm territory.
Depending on the version of this amp you have (there are a few different driver boards, the most obvious way to tell) the amp is a regulated design. What that means is that it is a high current amp and will double its output to the limit of the regulator with lower dropout than a typical capacitor bank alone can, and if I recall there is a bit over 21A current x2 in reserve, which is sufficent, if not excessive, for home audio reproduction. This was the method Bryston and many others used in their amps and gives full bass authority and drive even though it doesn't have the "peak power" ratings. This circuit type opposes voltage drop and keeps the voltage "stiff" and keeps current delivery linear. The end result is that it gives no sonic indication of "running out of gas" until the clip indicator comes on and you hear it. Unregulated designs or those that at least don't have some type of servo compensation will sound worse as the demand increases, and if there was any shred of truth to "bigger amps sounding better", it would apply to those taking rail voltage directly off the transformer secondaries' rectifier banks. Even then, I call bs on the usual claims as there is far more to an amp than just end current, with plenty of splendid-sounding low power amps standing testament to that. Bryston's actually began to output less power below 4 ohms and is why many brands or lines to this day do not state their low impedance tests. Chances are, you won't hear the difference.
I have a friend who has one of these amps and it doesn't show any sign of slowing down on any speaker he's tried, including B&W ( not sure what model). He ran his with a set of Quad stats and it was an ear opener.
Last edited:
MudSlideSlim
Well-Known Member
I’m using a Yamaha M4 to drive the NS1000m and in another system the B and W 805 matrix and I’m always pleasantly surprised how well the M4 matches up to each of these speakers. When I’ve upgraded my preamp or DAC the M4 shines even more. I would the MX2000 would give similar results or most likely better results.
I find both speakers are very amp dependent ie the sound very different with different amps. I was happy as a clam running the 805 matrix with an Adcom 60 watts amp but the M4 really made them shine as they make the NS1000’s shine.
Michael
I find both speakers are very amp dependent ie the sound very different with different amps. I was happy as a clam running the 805 matrix with an Adcom 60 watts amp but the M4 really made them shine as they make the NS1000’s shine.
Michael