• 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

What is “The Yamaha Sound”?

T

Todd Dawson

Member
I know Yamaha’s tag line on their products is “natural sound”, but I’ve read various reviews where people call it something else, specifically “you’ll love this receiver if you like the Yamaha sound” etc..

Once upon a time, I was blissful unaware that any receiver had a specific sound to them, but now I know better. That said, is it even fair to generalize? I’ve read articles which state that Yamaha’s low end and high end receivers have a different sound signature.

I have the RXV-4A, a middle of the road receiver I’m quite happy with. I live in a small condominium downtown in a large city, so space is a concern. I have it paired with a Yamaha EQ-550, Elac Debut B6 2.0’s and an Elac 1010 subwoofer. I find the sound I get to be very warm, almost reminiscent of 70’s analogue. However, I’m not sure if that has more to do with the amp or the speakers. Honestly though, that little system rivals the large component system with tower speakers I owned back in the 1980’s when I had my house. Pretty amazing, really!
 
Register to hide this ad
I haven't gone very high-up on the product lineup which may sound different (or better) but I think of an emphasis on the mid to upper frequencies with a thin, bright, cold, detailed sound that sounds etched or 'metallized' for lack of a better term with some sibilance up top @ volume, similar to Onkyo I've also heard. I don't care for it and I also don't think it's very "natural" compared to more natural sounding equipment I've heard that doesn't label itself as such. It's like I'm supposed to be listening for the details when I am just trying to enjoy the fullness and richness of character of the sound that isn't there. Inter-connected equipment and others' ears will vary as will thoughts and impressions I suppose. I'd love to get my hands on some better Yamaha gear than the 80's/90's consumer-grade stuff I've heard to be able to hear something better from them because I've not been impressed and am sure they're capable of great sounding stuff when they feel like it. But like Sony, most of the time they just don't care.
 
Last edited:
I have an RX-Z9 and yes, it is very detailed, but I do enjoy the detail and run it in "Pure Direct" mode. But I really can't say that the Z9 is in the same class as the "lesser" Yamahas. The sound is very different than my KT-88 tube amp which lacks the high end detail.

 
Last edited:
onanysunday said:
I haven't gone very high-up on the product lineup which may sound different (or better) but I think of an emphasis on the mid to upper frequencies with a thin, bright, cold, detailed sound that sounds 'metallized' for lack of a better term with some sibilance up top @ volume, similar to Onkyo I've also heard. I don't care for it and I also don't think it's very "natural" compared to more natural sounding equipment I've heard that doesn't label itself as such. It's like I'm supposed to be listening for the details when I am just trying to enjoy the fullness and richness of character of the sound that isn't there. Inter-connected equipment and others' ears will vary as will thoughts and impressions I suppose. I'd love to get my hands on some better Yamaha gear than the 80's/90's consumer-grade stuff I've heard to be able to hear something better from them because I've not been impressed and am sure they're capable of great sounding stuff when they feel like it. But like Sony, most of the time they just don't care.
Click to expand...
Exactly! You and Toddalin just proved my point regarding Yamaha. I believe the sound you get really depends on which model of receiver / amplifier you’re listening to. There doesn’t seem to be any broad consensus. Personally, I’m a fan of warm sounding receivers that deliver a full bodied sound. Perhaps I lucked out, but that’s what the RXV-4A delivers. Then again, as I mentioned in my original post, it could just be the speakers. Interestingly enough, I’ve read reviews that say Yamaha’s high end receivers such as the RXA -8A have more of a clinical, detailed sound, and not the rolled off highs which I like.I suppose getting a tube like sound from a receiver would be sublime…
 
I owned a Yamaha R-V1105 for many years. Although some would call the sound clinical, I prefer to describe it a detailed. I actually preferred it to the Rotel RX-1052 that replaced it. The Rotel had a fullness of sound, but with far less detail than the Yamaha.

Amp/speaker pairing does make a difference. I have a Sansui AU-919 that sounds amazing, with one pair of speakers. And yet, a little to bright/brittle with another.

It matters not what others think, as long as you enjoy the sound.

Mosfet amps produce a more tube like sound. There may be a few out there, but I don't know of any receivers that used mosfet outputs.
 
rickb119 said:
I owned a Yamaha R-V1105 for many years. Although some would call the sound clinical, I prefer to describe it a detailed. I actually preferred it to the Rotel RX-1052 that replaced it. The Rotel had a fullness of sound, but with far less detail than the Yamaha.

Amp/speaker pairing does make a difference. I have a Sansui AU-919 that sounds amazing, with one pair of speakers. And yet, a little to bright/brittle with another.

It matters not what others think, as long as you enjoy the sound.

Mosfet amps produce a more tube like sound. There may be a few out there, but I don't know of any receivers that used mosfet outputs.
Click to expand...
The sta2080 has mosfets in the preamp section it is a warm sound but not boomy like some of the other realistic models although boom can be fun !
 
ernieb1536 said:
The sta2080 has mosfets in the preamp section it is a warm sound but not boomy like some of the other realistic models although boom can be fun !
Click to expand...
That’s right! Radio Shack made receivers with mosfets in the early 1980’s. I’ve never been a fan of booming bass - case in point: My 1969 Lafayette amplifier was notorious for it. You could barely even move the bass control past neutral without the bass overtaking everything. Ernie, which Realistic models had booming bass that you remember?
 
Depends on the age of the equipment. The early 620, 820, 1020 for instance we well defined, clean, clear along with the professional electronics. But when the 40 series came along with the switching power supplies and then the modular out puts it was down hill from then on. I retired in 05 only the professional Yamaha equipment still retained that smooth sound. When Yamaha went digital for HT processors the sound became worse, just like Denon, Marantz, Sony, etc. B&K had the best HT sound but the HT stuff wouldn't hold up. Mcintosh and other top of the line stiff sounded great but most folks couldn't afford it. I heard a Yamaha driving some B&W speakers at Audio Classics, this spring. What a horrible combination. The Luxman tube pieces were the best with the B&W speakers. Smooth and clear as glass. ,
 
onanysunday said:
thin, bright, cold, detailed sound that sounds etched or 'metallized' for lack of a better term with some sibilance up top @ volume
Click to expand...
That sounds like quite an indictment. IME, the combination of the speakers and the amp create the sound field, as @twiiii noted. I’ve had the good fortune to hear most of the major brands on a parade of speakers. I’ve heard the same amp sound dry and lifeless on one set of speakers, only to come alive on another.

I find that the Yamaha pro amps have kept a hint of the original sound, but still have a different sound than the consumer amps, and that a 70s amp bears little resemblance to a 90s and or a modern one. Don’t buy too deeply into the marketing hype. What is ‘Natural Sound’ anyway?

Sounds like you’ve put together a system that sounds right to you. I’d love to give that combo a listen
 
Last edited:
rickb119 said:
Mosfet amps produce a more tube like sound.
Click to expand...
The marketing spiel for mosfets used to claim that mosfets were similar to tubes (aka valves) but that was based on the fact that they have a high input impedance like tubes, unlike bipolar power transistors which have a relatively low input impedance and need medium power tranistors to drive them.
However, most mosfet power amps are made using fairly standard transistor circuit topology (long tail pair at the input, split rail power supply, DC coupled output etc.) and have much more in common with bipolar transistor amplifiers than tube amplifiers. Of course, they aren't always like that - Nelson Pass's designs are quite different for example.
Anyway, I don't agree that mosfets have a particular "sound" per se. It all depends on what circuit is employed.
 
Sta2000 and sta2100 were known to have booming bass my brother in laws sta2000 has the boom ! but I told him he could control it with an equalizer but he likes it that way! I much prefer the sta2080 has a much more refined sound but if I ever run across s sta200o or sta2100 I’d pick them up their good receivers !
 
The Yamaha "Natural Sound" disappeared long ago. Todays Yamaha does not have any more of distinct sound signature than almost any other comparable receiver. You can blame/thank HT processing for that.

At the time when "Natural Sound" was a thing, some people called it "cold" or "sterile" when compared to Marantz, Pioneer, Sansui, Kenwood etc. At that time(mid 70's to late 80's) every manufacturer had its own house sound. Even though an amplifier shouldn't add or detract from the original signal every manufacturer has their own recipe. Its a little like chocolate chip cookies, everyones grandma has their own recipie and even using the same or similar ingredients, somehow they all taste different.

If you are happy with what you have and hear, then enjoy it for what it is and dont worry about what someone else thinks it should sound like. You are the only one who has to enjoy your system.
 
rothwellaudio said:
The marketing spiel for mosfets used to claim that mosfets were similar to tubes (aka valves) but that was based on the fact that they have a high input impedance like tubes, unlike bipolar power transistors which have a relatively low input impedance and need medium power tranistors to drive them.
However, most mosfet power amps are made using fairly standard transistor circuit topology (long tail pair at the input, split rail power supply, DC coupled output etc.) and have much more in common with bipolar transistor amplifiers than tube amplifiers. Of course, they aren't always like that - Nelson Pass's designs are quite different for example.
Anyway, I don't agree that mosfets have a particular "sound" per se. It all depends on what circuit is employed.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I should have prefaced that statement with "many claim" since I have no first hand experience comparing the two.

I was unaware of "The marketing spiel for mosfets", and based my statement on the reviews of others, on this site. Were they influenced by marketing spiel, or by their own personal experience? :dunno:
 
rickb119 said:
I was unaware of "The marketing spiel for mosfets", and based my statement on the reviews of others, on this site. Were they influenced by marketing spiel, or by their own personal experience? :dunno:
Click to expand...
I think I first encountered mosfets when they started to be used in guitar amps. At that time, maybe the early 1980's, valve guitar amps were very desirable (and still are), whereas the resurgence of valve hi-fi amps hadn't really gained much momentum. The advertisements for mosfet guitar amps all claimed that mosfets were very much like solid state valves. It was marketing hype.
Of course, guitar amps and hi-fi amps are worlds apart.
 
onanysunday said:
I haven't gone very high-up on the product lineup which may sound different (or better) but I think of an emphasis on the mid to upper frequencies with a thin, bright, cold, detailed sound that sounds etched or 'metallized' for lack of a better term with some sibilance up top @ volume, similar to Onkyo I've also heard. I don't care for it and I also don't think it's very "natural" compared to more natural sounding equipment I've heard that doesn't label itself as such. It's like I'm supposed to be listening for the details when I am just trying to enjoy the fullness and richness of character of the sound that isn't there. Inter-connected equipment and others' ears will vary as will thoughts and impressions I suppose. I'd love to get my hands on some better Yamaha gear than the 80's/90's consumer-grade stuff I've heard to be able to hear something better from them because I've not been impressed and am sure they're capable of great sounding stuff when they feel like it. But like Sony, most of the time they just don't care.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but my 90s Onkyo receiver is neither thin nor bright. Maybe you are discussing modern stuff, which I'm sure is different and worse at the same price point.
 
Dont believe in this audiophoolry that companies design a house sound into their electronics. Those so called professional reviewers that claim this nonsense all shy away from DBT, the only way to accurately assess something like this. All electronics amplifier manufactures strive for the flatest widest possible almost always achieving bandwidth beyond the audible range. Do get a house sound, your simply messing with the amplitude response in a certain frequency range. I put these su jective audio reviewers in the same category as movie critics, useless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom