Joe. Firstly let me offer you the "review" I did (in another forum) after buying the Benchmark. It was written 4 years ago and the Benchmark was the first SS amp I'd tried. I'm sure it's a great amp in many systems, but it failed to impress with my AGs.
I'll follow up with a list of other amps I've had in my Avantgarde system (Unos until last year, now Duos) including NAD and Accuphase. Peter
Benchmark AHB2 with Avantgarde Speakers – What a Disappointment!
I’ve recently been looking for a solid state amplifier as an alternative to my 845-based Single Ended Triode monoblocks (Consonance Cyber 845s) with my Avantgarde speakers. Why? Because I thought that I’d have it on much more of the time and would listen to more music. Partly as valves (I call them valves, you probably call them tubes) don’t last for ever and are costly to replace, partly as it takes time to switch them on and wait for warm-up and partly because Avantgarde’s own electronics are all solid state.
Avantgarde Uno speakers have very high efficiency (102 dB) and so don’t need megawatts to power them. Consequently a very high signal to noise ratio is needed. The SETs are pretty quiet but the Benchmark is reported to be MUCH quieter – at 130 dB possibly the quietest amplifier on the market.
OK – I did a bit of research by reading and asking questions on AA and AVS forums, plus I read reviews, although these were few far between for the Benchmark. I was most interested to read a couple of long threads on AVS initiated by an Avantgarde Trio owner who had recently bought the Benchmark and reckons it’s the best amp he’s ever had with his Trios, including many valve and much more costly SS amps. His descriptions were pretty convincing, so I took the plunge. I just bought it on the basis that, if it was so fantastic powering Trios, it must be equally brilliant with Unos.
It duly arrived and was installed between my recently acquired NAD M12 streamer / DAC / preamp (with BluOS MDC Module) and the speakers. My music is stored on a NAS, so nothing else is needed.
When evaluating new equipment, I prefer to just turn off old equipment and listen to nothing but the new stuff for a couple of weeks or more, rather than do side-by-side comparisons straight away. This is because one gets used to a particular sound and a new and unfamiliar sound is often instinctively less well received and because it gives the new product time to “run in”.
After 3 weeks of listening only to the Benchmark, my thoughts were that the bass was a bit better, the background noise is completely non-existent and it generally sounded pretty good, although nothing spectacularly better than before.
Now the real test! I made a short playlist of 6 tracks that I chose because I know them well and they were good for evaluation purposes – some with prodigious bass, others with pure voices, piano, almost inaudible delicacies, etc. I played them first using the Benchmark. I was inclined to listen to the first minute of each track, then push on to the next, but I stuck to it. Then I switched to the SETs. Although these had not been used for some weeks and the output valves really should be replaced with newer and probably better ones, they immediately rendered the music much more open and exciting to listen to. I was not once tempted to skip on to the next track, despite the fact that I’d heard them all half an hour earlier.
I can’t fully explain exactly the differences, but it was akin to listening to a live acoustic performance versus listening to music through loudspeakers. The difference was not slight – it was dramatic. There is no “tingle factor” and no goose-bumps when listening with the Benchmark. If anyone says that the Benchmark is more accurate – frankly I don’t care – I listen to music with my ears, not an oscilloscope! It was dull and lifeless by comparison. If you listen to live music there’s inevitably background noise (you’re sharing the auditorium with other people) and the acoustics are possibly not as good as a recording studio, but despite all the drawbacks, live music is so much more exciting to listen to. Similarly with the valve amps, an evening listening to music is thoroughly enjoyable. With the Benchmark it was little better than loud background music. Furthermore, the inclination was to turn down the volume of the Benchmark and turn up the SETs – inaccuracies, slight background noise and all! Music should be a thrilling experience and the Benchmark sadly doesn’t offer thrills.
I’m sure the Benchmark is a splendid amp when compared with many other SS amps. Certainly it’s streets ahead of my Red Wine Audio Signature 30.2 LFP-V amplifier (Tripath-based). Benchmark may use the best digital technology around (THX’s AAA), but for me, the proof of a good amplifier is how much I enjoy the music and sadly the Benchmark bears no comparison with a good SET. Maybe it's unfair comparing a state-of-the-art $3000 amp with a positively primitive SET design costing twice as much, but I don't think so. Maybe the Benchmark is better suited to lesser speakers that are themselves unlikely to excite in the way that Avantgardes do.
The Benchmark has plenty of good points though. Apart from the aforementioned very low noise level of 130 dB, it offer fully balanced circuit, professional standard Speakon and domestic standard binding posts, a 3-way gain switch (ideal for those with high efficiency speakers or with low level sources), it’s small and fuel-efficient (keeps cool at any volume level) and is available in silver or black, free-standing or rack-mounted. All great on paper but disappointing to listen to. Perhaps the manufacturer of professional equipment primarily intended for studios has to be more interested in measured results than the pleasure it offers listeners.
I'll follow up with a list of other amps I've had in my Avantgarde system (Unos until last year, now Duos) including NAD and Accuphase. Peter
Benchmark AHB2 with Avantgarde Speakers – What a Disappointment!
I’ve recently been looking for a solid state amplifier as an alternative to my 845-based Single Ended Triode monoblocks (Consonance Cyber 845s) with my Avantgarde speakers. Why? Because I thought that I’d have it on much more of the time and would listen to more music. Partly as valves (I call them valves, you probably call them tubes) don’t last for ever and are costly to replace, partly as it takes time to switch them on and wait for warm-up and partly because Avantgarde’s own electronics are all solid state.
Avantgarde Uno speakers have very high efficiency (102 dB) and so don’t need megawatts to power them. Consequently a very high signal to noise ratio is needed. The SETs are pretty quiet but the Benchmark is reported to be MUCH quieter – at 130 dB possibly the quietest amplifier on the market.
OK – I did a bit of research by reading and asking questions on AA and AVS forums, plus I read reviews, although these were few far between for the Benchmark. I was most interested to read a couple of long threads on AVS initiated by an Avantgarde Trio owner who had recently bought the Benchmark and reckons it’s the best amp he’s ever had with his Trios, including many valve and much more costly SS amps. His descriptions were pretty convincing, so I took the plunge. I just bought it on the basis that, if it was so fantastic powering Trios, it must be equally brilliant with Unos.
It duly arrived and was installed between my recently acquired NAD M12 streamer / DAC / preamp (with BluOS MDC Module) and the speakers. My music is stored on a NAS, so nothing else is needed.
When evaluating new equipment, I prefer to just turn off old equipment and listen to nothing but the new stuff for a couple of weeks or more, rather than do side-by-side comparisons straight away. This is because one gets used to a particular sound and a new and unfamiliar sound is often instinctively less well received and because it gives the new product time to “run in”.
After 3 weeks of listening only to the Benchmark, my thoughts were that the bass was a bit better, the background noise is completely non-existent and it generally sounded pretty good, although nothing spectacularly better than before.
Now the real test! I made a short playlist of 6 tracks that I chose because I know them well and they were good for evaluation purposes – some with prodigious bass, others with pure voices, piano, almost inaudible delicacies, etc. I played them first using the Benchmark. I was inclined to listen to the first minute of each track, then push on to the next, but I stuck to it. Then I switched to the SETs. Although these had not been used for some weeks and the output valves really should be replaced with newer and probably better ones, they immediately rendered the music much more open and exciting to listen to. I was not once tempted to skip on to the next track, despite the fact that I’d heard them all half an hour earlier.
I can’t fully explain exactly the differences, but it was akin to listening to a live acoustic performance versus listening to music through loudspeakers. The difference was not slight – it was dramatic. There is no “tingle factor” and no goose-bumps when listening with the Benchmark. If anyone says that the Benchmark is more accurate – frankly I don’t care – I listen to music with my ears, not an oscilloscope! It was dull and lifeless by comparison. If you listen to live music there’s inevitably background noise (you’re sharing the auditorium with other people) and the acoustics are possibly not as good as a recording studio, but despite all the drawbacks, live music is so much more exciting to listen to. Similarly with the valve amps, an evening listening to music is thoroughly enjoyable. With the Benchmark it was little better than loud background music. Furthermore, the inclination was to turn down the volume of the Benchmark and turn up the SETs – inaccuracies, slight background noise and all! Music should be a thrilling experience and the Benchmark sadly doesn’t offer thrills.
I’m sure the Benchmark is a splendid amp when compared with many other SS amps. Certainly it’s streets ahead of my Red Wine Audio Signature 30.2 LFP-V amplifier (Tripath-based). Benchmark may use the best digital technology around (THX’s AAA), but for me, the proof of a good amplifier is how much I enjoy the music and sadly the Benchmark bears no comparison with a good SET. Maybe it's unfair comparing a state-of-the-art $3000 amp with a positively primitive SET design costing twice as much, but I don't think so. Maybe the Benchmark is better suited to lesser speakers that are themselves unlikely to excite in the way that Avantgardes do.
The Benchmark has plenty of good points though. Apart from the aforementioned very low noise level of 130 dB, it offer fully balanced circuit, professional standard Speakon and domestic standard binding posts, a 3-way gain switch (ideal for those with high efficiency speakers or with low level sources), it’s small and fuel-efficient (keeps cool at any volume level) and is available in silver or black, free-standing or rack-mounted. All great on paper but disappointing to listen to. Perhaps the manufacturer of professional equipment primarily intended for studios has to be more interested in measured results than the pleasure it offers listeners.
