what hi-fi 19 best amplifiers

In my experience some reviews are paid for..... and some are not.

Hi-if pig is often mentioned as a good independent reviewer, but as has been said it’s just someone’s  opinions.

Why not just decide for yourself????

spurrier sucks posted:

SuperNait did not get 5 stars in the review I read from WHF. 4 star if I remember correctly and not high praise at all. 

Hi-Fi Critic is excellent as is HFN, WHF and HFC. HF+ is also an excellent read.

Here ya go!!!

Naim Supernait 2 review | What Hi-Fi?

TOBYJUG posted:

That Audiolab 8000A was smooth, rich and with plenty presence though.

Yep. I enjoyed my time with one of those.

At least WHF? back their opinions up with a show they help to host at Bristol each year.

As did I. I purchased one of the early ones, which my brother inherited and still runs very well to this day. In fact, I also still use an 8000A in a bedroom system to this day. 

A game changer at its price level when it came onto the scene, and pretty much bullet-proof in respect of its build quality. 

It was almost universally exceptionally well received when it was first released, but my recollection is that one or two specific hi-fi magazines (that tended to recommend early Naim, Exposure, Musical Fidelity (A1 & A100), Cyrus or NAD amps to the exclusion of almost anything else) fairly quickly began to completely rubbish it, suggesting not only that it was not a match for their favourites, but also that no one in their right mind should consider buying one. I really struggled to understand this opinion.

Nice and justified to see the A&R A60 make the list.  I had one of those, too. It trounced many other amps which purported to have more power.  I seem to remember needing to keep a few spare fuses nearby for 'enthusiastic' listening sessions, though.     

It's great to see a Pioneer A400 (the original) on the list. I still have a 1991 mint example in a cupboard and it still works perfect. I keep meaning to pass it on to my youngest son but i just can't quite let it go...

I tried and tried to get on with the Audiolab 8000a. It was nicely built, reliable as anything, and was always quiet, flexible, highly competent. The first one I had was an early example bought secondhand. It stood in for many others when away for servicing, valve changes, repairs etc.. I admired it, respected it, but love it..?? No. So When I was given a later black model... Still no. So when, in a trade, I got one of the last before the TAG purchase. Still no. But oh how I wanted to love it. But the sad fact wS that even a NAIT or an ION Obelisk 3x or even an A&R A60 were just more fun and more engaging. 

It seems worthwhile to mention here that a number of manufacturers will not deliver their products to magazine reviewers. That requires the reviewer to purchase the product should they wish to review it, which rarely if ever happens. Ergo, these manufacturers reserve an unbiased objectivity to the ear of the potential buyer, save for forum feedback. Plenty of non-mainstream hidden gems out there, especially when considering speakers, cables and TT carts.

Like many here, the A60 was my first proper amp.

But all with a grain of salt. The 282, for example, has not been reviewed in the English language press to the best of my knowledge. It can only be a list of what graced their desk.

Richard Dane posted:

I tried and tried to get on with the Audiolab 8000a. It was nicely built, reliable as anything, and was always quiet, flexible, highly competent. The first one I had was an early example bought secondhand. It stood in for many others when away for servicing, valve changes, repairs etc.. I admired it, respected it, but love it..?? No. So When I was given a later black model... Still no. So when, in a trade, I got one of the last before the TAG purchase. Still no. But oh how I wanted to love it. But the sad fact wS that even a NAIT or an ION Obelisk 3x or even an A&R A60 were just more fun and more engaging. 

The trick with the Audiolab 8000A was to use a CD player that tended towards a 'wayward' presentation - e.g. an Exposure 2010s.  This also applies to the 8000S and 8000Q which were better, mainly because the TL072 was replace with a OPA2134.

That approach 'kicked it into life" while it also ameliorated the excesses of the Exposure CD (particularly at HF and ultrasonically) - the result was surprisingly well balanced.

wenger2015 posted:

In my experience some reviews are paid for..... and some are not.

Is that 'experience' real-life, actually lived experience; or 'this bloke down the pub's friend of his neighbour's cousin's mate read about it on the internet' experience? Can you name names? I think everyone would be very interested in knowing more about the brands and title involved.

Shall I wait with bated breath, or not bother?

feeling_zen posted:

Like many here, the A60 was my first proper amp.

But all with a grain of salt. The 282, for example, has not been reviewed in the English language press to the best of my knowledge. It can only be a list of what graced their desk.

given how well regarded it is in the Naim line-up, it's quite strange it's never been reviewed ?

the 202 and 252 got the what hi-fi reviews (both 5 stars)

Why 19 amps I ask myself. Answer: because What Hifi is a random list generator. And here is the proof:-

12 of the listed amps are from this century. Ok.

What HiFi have another feature called the best amps of the 21st century, featuring 13 amps. Ah, that list  goes up to 2017, whereas the 19 best in the past 40 years only goes up to 2016, so, I hear you assume, that accounts for the difference, 12 in each list to 2016 then. Yes, indeed ...but here is the amazing fact: not a single amp appears in both lists! 

Conclusion: What Hifi is a random list generator, and you can safely ignore any and all inclusions or exclusions, and so no need to sell off your current amp to buy one from the list(s).

IIRC, I think the NAC282 has been reviewed in either Hifi World or Hifi News (or maybe both?).  And I think the Stereoplay review is still available to view on the Music Line Website.

spurrier sucks posted:

SuperNait did not get 5 stars in the review I read from WHF. 4 star if I remember correctly and not high praise at all. 

They definitely got that one wrong!

They definitely got SN2 right at 5 stars. First decent amp I owned.

hastings posted:

spurrier sucks posted:

SuperNait did not get 5 stars in the review I read from WHF. 4 star if I remember correctly and not high praise at all. 

They definitely got that one wrong!

I do recognize their observations, but I deeply love mine.

Kevin-W posted:

wenger2015 posted:

In my experience some reviews are paid for..... and some are not.

Is that 'experience' real-life, actually lived experience; or 'this bloke down the pub's friend of his neighbour's cousin's mate read about it on the internet' experience? Can you name names? I think everyone would be very interested in knowing more about the brands and title involved.

Shall I wait with bated breath, or not bother?

In my humble opinion it’s always best to just make up ones own mind. 

wenger2015 posted:

Kevin-W posted:

wenger2015 posted:

In my experience some reviews are paid for..... and some are not.

Is that 'experience' real-life, actually lived experience; or 'this bloke down the pub's friend of his neighbour's cousin's mate read about it on the internet' experience? Can you name names? I think everyone would be very interested in knowing more about the brands and title involved.

Shall I wait with bated breath, or not bother?

In my humble opinion it’s always best to just make up ones own mind. 

I was told by a rep of a British brand that regularly gets 5 stars in What HiFi, that money does not change hands. However, they went on to admit that there is a clear relationship with ratings and how much face time they put in at the publication's offices, the fancy dinners they take staff to and how chummy in general they get with the publication staff and the fringe incentives they creatively come up with.

And no, the name of the brand cannot be pried out of me.

Taking advice from an established and reasonably well respected HIFI magazine is certainly no worse than taking it from members on internet forums.  As WENGER2015 said above make up your own mind based on your own experience.

feeling_zen posted:

wenger2015 posted:

Kevin-W posted:

wenger2015 posted:

In my experience some reviews are paid for..... and some are not.

Is that 'experience' real-life, actually lived experience; or 'this bloke down the pub's friend of his neighbour's cousin's mate read about it on the internet' experience? Can you name names? I think everyone would be very interested in knowing more about the brands and title involved.

Shall I wait with bated breath, or not bother?

In my humble opinion it’s always best to just make up ones own mind. 

I was told by a rep of a British brand that regularly gets 5 stars in What HiFi, that money does not change hands. However, they went on to admit that there is a clear relationship with ratings and how much face time they put in at the publication's offices, the fancy dinners they take staff to and how chummy in general they get with the publication staff and the fringe incentives they creatively come up with.

And no, the name of the brand cannot be pried out of me.

But I can think of some very large market positioning  organisations in the Corporate space where exactly the same principle applies... 

Money doesn't have to change hands directly does it? It just becomes apparent that if you don't advertise regularly you don't get reviewed much.

But I can think of some very large market positioning  organisations in the Corporate space where exactly the same principle applies... 

Dammit - you beat me to it

JedT posted:

Money doesn't have to change hands directly does it? It just becomes apparent that if you don't advertise regularly you don't get reviewed much.

Linn and Rega spend virtually nothing on advertising in any publication these days, and don't seem to have any trouble getting coverage or good reviews...

...another conspiracy theory bites the dust.