• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Now that's the build quality I'm talking about

Build Quality

A subjective quality, I think. Especially since the device in question (the Yamaha A-S3000 for example) is designed to produce a sonic experience, in itself a subjective quality: said experience depends on other devices and on the environment in which it's delivered. What it looks like may not matter for some; for others, a big part of the experience. Ultimately, what really matters is the delivery of a sonic quality. I'll bet some talented Rube Goldberg could cobble together an equal experience to the A-S3000 (the Amp Camp Amp comes to mind), but what that would look like is probably not the 'Build Quality' that this thread seems interested in. So, what Vintagear is referring to as 'build quality' is a level of manufacture above the norm: and if you look at the Yamaha spec sheet you see a lot of really interesting and detailed manufacturing sophistry (like a copper-plated chassis!). Seems to me quite simple, you adopt a scale-of-quality for the purpose: like (from low to high) 1/BPS 2/cheap-but-works (toss, get new in x years) 3/quality 4/high quality 5/high quality beauty queen 6/bequeath to grandchildren. Me, I like quality, and pursue it as I am able. I'd love to sit down with an A-S3000 in my own living room and see just how good it is. But for now, I'm going to limit my pursuit to (maybe) a pair of NS-1000s.
 
UMRKretread said:
A subjective quality, I think. Especially since the device in question (the Yamaha A-S3000 for example) is designed to produce a sonic experience, in itself a subjective quality: said experience depends on other devices and on the environment in which it's delivered. What it looks like may not matter for some; for others, a big part of the experience. Ultimately, what really matters is the delivery of a sonic quality. I'll bet some talented Rube Goldberg could cobble together an equal experience to the A-S3000 (the Amp Camp Amp comes to mind), but what that would look like is probably not the 'Build Quality' that this thread seems interested in. So, what Vintagear is referring to as 'build quality' is a level of manufacture above the norm: and if you look at the Yamaha spec sheet you see a lot of really interesting and detailed manufacturing sophistry (like a copper-plated chassis!). Seems to me quite simple, you adopt a scale-of-quality for the purpose: like (from low to high) 1/BPS 2/cheap-but-works (toss, get new in x years) 3/quality 4/high quality 5/high quality beauty queen 6/bequeath to grandchildren. Me, I like quality, and pursue it as I am able. I'd love to sit down with an A-S3000 in my own living room and see just how good it is. But for now, I'm going to limit my pursuit to (maybe) a pair of NS-1000s.
Click to expand...



With that explanation I figured the bar would have been a little higher.
 
restorer-john said:
As I mentioned further back in the thread, there are many parameters that contribute to the level of build quality and aluminium knobs and levers are definitely an indication of build quality. Not the sole contributor but a valid indicator without a doubt.
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, the Dynaco PAT-4 preamp had machined aluminum knobs. I don't think many AK'ers would hold it up as an example of outstanding build quality or sound quality.
 
Again, it's not just one thing or another that determines build quality. There are MANY contributing factors, and I have outlined several, and construction techniques that determine build quality and NONE of those factors individually, or when combined, translate 100% of the time to a guarantee of sound quality, but they are part and parcel of an overall level of technical performance unattainable without such techniques.

It would be foolish however to suggest that an overall poor build quality amplifier can, or will have, an excellent performance, as amplifier design and construction is a mature, well understood field of design and manufacture.



Dr Tinear said:
For what it's worth, the Dynaco PAT-4 preamp had machined aluminum knobs. I don't think many AK'ers would hold it up as an example of outstanding build quality or sound quality.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
It would be a shame if the knobs on a high quality unit like the Leben CS-600 were plastic,



they remind me of the knobs on the Sansui Definition Series (AU-20000).

 
restorer-john said:
It would be foolish however to suggest that an overall poor build quality amplifier can, or will have, an excellent performance, as amplifier design and construction is a mature, well understood field of design and manufacture.
Click to expand...

Doesn't that then mean that excellent performence is, of itself, indicitive of excellent build quality?
 
Vintagear said:
It would be a shame if the knobs on a high quality unit like the Leben CS-600 were plastic,
Click to expand...

In the flesh the black plastic switches on the Leben look kind'a tacky and out of place. The knobs are nice.

I think the switch is more important than the knobs, know what I mean? ;)
 
Tom Brennan said:
In the flesh the black plastic switches on the Leben look kind'a tacky and out of place.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree, they could have done better with those for sure. I'd imagine they've received feedback on that from their customers and distributors. We can't be the only one's who noticed. Hopefully future models will have more congruous and durable switches.
 
I have observed that excellent audio performance can be achieved with various degrees of build quality if you have excellent circuit design.

With that said, I think the manufacturer's who have obtained excellent performance have achieved some minimum level of build quality necessary to allow their good circuit design to perform well.

You must have excellent circuit design as a base to start from. Great build quality on a poorly designed audio circuit only provides more reliable operation and best execution of the poorly designed audio path.
 
Reynolds531 said:
I look at it from a different perspective. If a modern integrated amp was available in 1978 sitting on the shelf playing clear quiet detailed and accurate music from a digital server everyone's jaw would have hit the floor and nobody would have bought the Sansui on the shelf next to it until the Sansui was at liquidation prices. I bought my first decent stereo in 1978 and have no doubt that meters and knobs and weight would have quickly been perceived as obsolescence, not quality.

If someone tooled up and built a few 1978Chevy Chevettes today they might cost $100,000 each. Says nothing about quality oh $30,000 cars today.
Click to expand...

I disagree 100%

I run digital files through a Sansui AU-719, little brother to the "wire with gain" AU-919 and peoples jaws drop now. If an amp is neutral and clean, it's neutral and clean. In the late '70's a brand new AU-919 would have amplified exactly what you fed it. Just as a restored one does today.

The auto and computer analogies I see all too often are irrelevant because A/B audio amplifier technology has not progress at the pace that those manufacturing segments have.
 
Vintagear said:
I disagree 100%

I run digital files through a Sansui AU-719, little brother to the "wire with gain" AU-919 and peoples jaws drop now. If an amp is neutral and clean, it's neutral and clean. In the late '70's a brand new AU-919 would have amplified exactly what you fed it. Just as a restored one does today.

The auto and computer analogies I see all too often are irrelevant because A/B audio amplifier technology has not progress at the pace that those manufacturing segments have.
Click to expand...
Which doesn't mean they haven't progressed. And dramatically. And yes, I've had a series of late 70's and early 800 Sansui's.
 
Class AB amplifier technology hasn't progressed since the 80s, let alone 'dramatically'. The components used in current class AB amps are nothing special, have had no real development since the 1980s and are of limited types and characteristics. The technology has matured. The fact that boutique manufacturers are utilising stockpiles of NOS 80s and 90s components are testament to the fact that modern equivalents are either unavailable or simply not nearly good enough.

Other classes and technologies have definitely evolved- switching amps of course being the main type and these designs require specialised components and techniques to suit- the demand is there so they are being produced.

Ultimately, if build quality is what this thread is about, the components, construction and materials are what determines that. Sound quality is a by- product of circuit design and component implementation along with construction techniques . I have never heard a superb testing amplifier that was poorly built- have you?
 
The only components that have progressed dramatically are the OpAmps.
Since lots of 70's and 80's amps used some variation of OpAmps, they can be improved.
Some used discrete circuits to achieve the same result... is not too much that can be done there.
 
How is my meaning unclear?

I (myself) have never heard (listened to) a superb testing (as measured by me) amplifier that was poorly built.

My points are these: Poor build quality amplifiers are unlikely to test well when all facets of build quality are considered. From my experience testing and repairing hundreds of amplifiers, of all vintages, there is no question as to the major contributors to sound quality and measured results.

High build quality amplifiers are considerably more likely to a) test well and b) sound better than poorly built amplifiers.

Any other conclusion is facetious.

Your Dynaco ST-400 may have been poorly built and may have 'sounded superb' to you. How did it perform on your test bench?



Tom Brennan said:
Your meaning is unclear; are you talking about listening or testing? Sonics or bench tests?

In any event my Dynaco ST-400 was poorly built (by me) and sounded superb.
Click to expand...
 
To go a little wider than just certain countries' products, I would also include in laudible build quality products like the Quad II, Leaks and similar British and German equipment.

Hesitating to dare mention 'definition of build quality' again, may I modestly say that the percentage of narrative regarding this caught me by surprise ..... In that sense my sympathy to Vintagegear. At long last someone asked for a definition of 'build quality' (huraay!) - and no sooner than the point took a tangent of its own ... Gee-Whizz! I heaved an inner sigh of relief when Restorer-John started to take part.

Not to sound derogatory re any poster; perhaps I am simply deluded by thinking that more than 'how-it-sounds' makes an amplifier. But using cars again, there is a difference between a Rolls Royce and a - never mind - other than the price.

Yes, one can hardly get away from sound quality, but then again; the request by the OP right at the beginning had me thinking that to take part in this discussion as asked - the device did not even have to work - er - be switched on! As a designer and constructor myself of some experience, I realise that, particularly for the last decade or two, economy/competition started to play a choking role on neatness of construction (to use another term I broadly associate with quality). Still I cannot but be taken aback by the spider's nests I increasingly observe, particularly where most recently p.c.s do not form the bulk of construction. (I regret to say that in this respect products from the East generally come second-best.) The rest as said (terminals, knobs et al).

So, looking forward to more enlightenment ....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom