Benchmark Media Systems. Right or wrong

 

mijostyn OP

8,196 posts

04-30-2024 at 07:13am

…

@audphile1 If I blinded you you would never be able to tell the difference between most DACs.

If I cut one of your ears off you would be half blind. If I cut the other ear off you would be completely blind. This is because the hat that you were wearing when you came over to blind me would just fall over your eyes. We vcan then do a blind test where you will tell me if you can hear the difference. 

@macg19  That is why it was a brave thing to do. However, if all manufacturers of great equipment would take this stance instead of keeping their mouths shut, scared of losing sales, there would not be near as much mythology and people would have more money to spend on great equipment instead of pissing it away on garbage. People with an electronics engineering education can spot the BS right away. Most of us do not and we have a hard time filtering out the nonsense. However with some science background you can research almost anything on the net. It takes time and effort, but when spending serious money, worth it. I assume from the start that everything is marketing, and marketing is mythology designed to sell the product. Thus, it is up to me to validate any claims.  

Getting back to the question, right or wrong…

Generally, right.

But someone spent a lot of time writing an essay that likely won’t increase sales…and some of numbers were way off…like $200 isolation platforms…sign me up!

@jnovak Correct. There is no such thing as one amp for all. Amps have to be matched to the loudspeaker. 

@audphile1 If I blinded you you would never be able to tell the difference between most DACs.

What recordings sound like in the studio can not be used as a baseline. Most recordingings can not be used either. Only a few live recordings are acceptable. Only with experience and the most accurate loudspeaker/room combinations can you determine what a component is really doing as the differences with the vast majority of electronics is very minor. Amplifiers are a special case because they have to be matched to the loudspeaker, a mismatch at best will sound bad and at worst will blow up the amp which I have had the pleasure of doing. JC 1s RIP.

I am about to spend a small fortune on what some are saying are the best headphones in the world. The designer of the phones used the Benchmark AHB2 to design them.

He is now become more of a tube or distortion fan in his sound reproduction gear, but when designing his gear, he used the AHB2.

Interestingly, I traded my AHB2 for the Benchmark HPA4 preamp + headphone amp because I wanted to hear as clean a reproduction of the sound as possible with this new phone. My best headphone amp for this new phone is a tube amp that likely measures badly. I have not heard the HPA4 with the new phones.

In any case this was a snake oil debate…we went off on a tangent. 

I've said for years "Someone needs to build great electronics at reasonable prices". Benchmark has joined that small group of achievers.  It makes a lot of sense to me that they are primarily a pro audio manufacturer. I own a AHB2. I am smitten with it. Still, it won't be one amp for all. I do respect Benchmarks opinion however.

Guys - neutral is not a thing. Everything adds color. Including your room and the chair you sit in. Your big furry dog and a coffee table between you and the speakers will alter the delivery enough to render it inaccurate.

You can keep telling yourself benchmark is neutral but it’s not. It’s a studio monitor type component that allows you to do your work with enough information you need to do it. 
There are much more resolving, clearer and better sounding DACs out there. Same will apply to amps and presmps. My last two DACs pull more from the recording than the benchmark ever did. So your accuracy theory is once again a moot point. And as I stated earlier, add perception to this formula. You’re making an argument but it’s just not a very good one. 

@audphile1 See, you are comparing playing music with music REPRODUCTION, which is two different things. I want my system to convey exactly what was recorded by the artist. To me that is accuracy and yes it will convey the emotion that the artist put in their music.

@mijostyn spot on and I totally agree. That is what I strive for as well.

@mijostyn I don’t like distortion. I am also 100% sure you have no idea what the musicians in the studio sounded like to use as your baseline for judging how accurate or neutral a component really is. It’s all a perception. So let’s not go there. 

@audphile1 Accuracy in electronics means conveying the original signal unchanged in any way except amplified. What musicians like in tube amps is the way they distort. The amp itself is a musical instrument. You like distortion and that is your business. The very best systems I have heard are accurate or as accurate as is possible with current tech. Benchmark gear gives you accuracy at a very competitive price. Whether or not one likes the AHB2 depends on the speaker. IMHO, modifying the sound in euphonic ways is unacceptable. I want what is on the record, nothing else.  

Let’s just not forget that accurate doesn’t only mean tonal accuracy. It also means accuracy in conveying the emotion. Saying that benchmark equipment is more accurate than tube preamps, DACs and amps is incorrect. Some of the best guitar amps used by musicians during live performances are tube amps. A lot of masterpieces were recorded using tube equipment 50+ years ago and to this day these albums sound incredible. Accurate and emotionally engaging. 
Hey if you like the Benchmark sound, good for you. It doesn’t mean it’s the best and most accurate though. 

When I see people trying one piece of electronics after another searching for a better sound it generally means they are not happy with their loudspeakers. You buy an amp that drives your chosen loudspeaker well. The rest of the electronics really do not matter that much. One might climb the ladder going from say a $5000 amp to a $20,000 amp, but I see people going endlessly sideways. IMHO that is wasting money that could have been spent on better loudspeakers which is where the real money is. Another possibility is adding a DSP preamp to the mix which will allow you to make a system sound any way you want. I have a close friend who was over listening to music and he mentioned that he wished he could turn his system up like my system, but when he did it got harsh and unlistenable. He has a very modest but well chosen system. We added a MiniDSP SHD and his system now sounds like one that should be 4 times as expensive and he can turn it up until his wife yells at him.  

Lastly, it’s my opinion and experience that the best Benchmark products are the LA4/HPA4 preamps. Their DAC3 is rather antiquated these days (and ugly AF) and the AHB2, while a good clean performer, doesn’t offer the dynamic grunt that many speakers (especially high end speakers) thrive on.

This is 100% my opinion too. I have owned the AHB2 about 5x and all 3 versions of the DACs. I still have the DAC3B since it serves a single purpose well (used with a tube headphone amp). The LA4/HPA4 are amazing gear. I no longer have any AHB2 since it was not the most dynamic with my Yamaha NS5000 or Magnepan LRS+. A CODA #16 and a Sanders Magtech overall were a better match.

A great pairing is Benchmark preamps with CODA amps. Similar to the Parasound A21 amp described above. I had the LA4 and the A21+ and that was good, so I eventually ended up with the CODA #16 and the LA4.

In fact, I have tried about 12 amps with the LA4, and all sounded good with the LA4. Cannot say the same level of success with other preamps I owned, such as the CODA 07x, Topping pre90, Schitt Mjolnir V3, Schitt Freya+, Bryston BP20, BAT VK-42SE.

@helomech

...don't get me started on ASR.  I just went down a ChiFi rabbit hole and can say most of ASR is blinded with very specific measurements that really aren't audible by the majority of people.  Don't dare say you can actually hear a difference with different DACs or you'll get ostracized.  What's funny is the Chinese manufacturers AND Amir actually release frequency graphs showing how they tune the sound of the same DACs ASR lauds and swears all sound the same.  (Specifically, Topping rolls off the highs a bit and fattens the bottom end on their flagship Sabre-based models compared to SMSL/VMV, which does the opposite, and I believe Topping also tunes the soundstage more for headphone users.) People on ASR also will admit the stock cables have a negative impact on sound, but also, don't dare bring up using a high-end cable and imply it actually makes a difference.

In the real world, people care about more than just SINAD and THD.  Stuff like product reliability, long term support, etc. matter.

I'm a Benchmark fanboi for sure.  Currently running DAC3 HGC as a DAC/Pre with the AHB2 amp to ATC speakers.  It's a dead quiet system across all inputs, and the S/N ratio is astounding, which allows me to to hear greater detail at lower 
SPL.  Star-quad interconnects, and speaker cables as I believe in that design after many years of stage and studio work.

"Walk up to your speakers. Do you hear a hiss, hum, or buzz. Your system should be dead quiet. With the current state of the art, the electronics should not be producing audible noise. If you hear noise, then you need to consider replacing some of your electronics. You are never going to cure this noise problem with a new fuse, or a new power cord. It is unlikely that you will even reduce it with a power conditioner. Instead, you will need to identify the offending component or components and make plans to replace them. Start by replacing components that only support unbalanced (RCA) analog interconnects. Replace any component that cannot deliver at least a 115 dB SNR."

@

deep_333

So why did you remove your post? Hmmm!

seems yogiboy we need a debate on the meaning of a comma in a sentence...

Debating challenged individuals would be a waste of time...

seems yogiboy we need a debate on the meaning of a comma in a sentence...

The problem with the Benchmark argument is the logical fallacy of faulty generalisation. Personally, I partly agree with the Benchmark post to wit, there are snake oil companies in the Hi-Fi business. I also agree that many audio cables are overpriced.  However, I do not agree with Benchmark's arch-objectivist attitude (one that's common among many people with their roots in pro audio) that a limited set of conventional measurements defines a component's performance when reproducing music.

@deep_333 Really?

"I have several tube amps, old sugden, old Pass, a load of chifi amp kits, etc in storage that are not counted/considered here."

From the company that puts measurements above all other factors.

And I’m sure their perfect specs have zero effect on user expectation having perfect sound reproduction.

Notice how the issue of psychoacoustic effect never applies to gear that measures “well”?

@deep_333 Sugden and Pass never made tube amps!

Why is it that such opinions are most often delivered with a large helping of condescension? It's as much about the writer's "wisdom"(ego) vs. "audiophools" as it is about the gear-- perhaps more.

Listeners often like components that impart artificial warmth or bloom. I get it completely—been there, done that. Benchmark gear doesn’t offer this (although it does result in excellent decay if the speakers and source allow). As with any system, the amplification has to produce synergy with the speakers and room. Benchmark is no different in that regard. It’s for this reason I still own their LA4 preamp but no longer use an AHB2, and instead use an OG Parasound A21. The A21 is not as resolving as the AHB2, but produces similar output to mono AHB2s for less than half the money, and imparts just enough second harmonic to add a bit of “glow” to the chain.

If my speakers didn’t have high-quality, high-resolution drivers, or if my DAC was an R2R that truncates the top octave, I would likely be better off with an AHB2. Because otherwise, the Parasound would be too “warm” in such a scenario. Again, this is all about synergy and careful component matching.

The LA4 will remain in my system for the foreseeable future because nearly every other preamp I’ve tried cannot match it in terms of transient speed and decay. In a way that’s disappointing, because I am not a big fan of the LA4’s aesthetic or its remote control. But somehow, even passive preamps are less resolving IME.

At one point I did have a system chain that would be an ASR member’s wet dream:

Revel F206 speakers with the Benchmark LA4 and AHB2, and a great measuring Topping DAC upstream. That system was actually one of the most enjoyable and fatigue-free I’ve ever assembled. Perhaps that’s mostly because the F206 speakers are practically distortion-free above 200Hz. Conversely, had I still owned MA Silver 8s at that time, I have zero doubt the Benchmark amps would have been far too sterile, because they would’ve fully revealed the true mediocrity of that speaker’s tweeters. It’s basically the same reason for why I would never pair a Benchmark stack with most Klipsch speakers, nor B&W’s 700 series. Essentially, any speaker with moderate or greater distortion would be immediately disqualified from the list of synergistic candidates.

Lastly, it’s my opinion and experience that the best Benchmark products are the LA4/HPA4 preamps. Their DAC3 is rather antiquated these days (and ugly AF) and the AHB2, while a good clean performer, doesn’t offer the dynamic grunt that many speakers (especially high end speakers) thrive on.
I’ve compared the LA4 back-to-back with preamps such as the McIntosh C49 and Coda CP (with aforementioned Electro ECD2 DAC and BMR Tower speakers). All else being equal, the LA4 is quite audibly a wholly superior preamp. The others are “warmer,” sure, but their overall performance suffers as a result. The LA4 yields a much more true-to-life sound. If you want to hear audience hand claps and cheers that sound as though they’re in your physical presence, the LA4 paired with low distortion speakers can get many systems closer to that goal.

@deep_333 Sterile? In relationship to most tube amps that would be better described as accurate. I suspect you would not like Boulder amps either.

@mijostyn

Sterile in comparison to my current SOLID STATE amps.

Luxman c900u+m900u

Yamaha c5000+m5000

Yamaha A-S2100

Technics SU R1000

Schiit TYR monoblocks

Jungson/Zhongshen Class A

or even my multichannel amp (supposed to be more sonically compromised than uppity 2 channel amps), Yamaha MX-A5200

There are no tubes in any of the above mentioned.

I have several tube amps, old sugden, old Pass, a load of chifi amp kits, etc in storage that are not counted/considered here.

@deep_333  Sterile? In relationship to most tube amps that would be better described as accurate. I suspect you would not like Boulder amps either. 

@jl35 Really? Do you have a measurement microphone? Do you have the experience of listening to systems with various target curves? Do you know what a flat response curve sounds like? Most audiophiles have never heard a system that images correctly. Many audiophiles are operating on mythology. 

IMHE, accurate equipment in summation leads to better performance in all respects. Many systems are the end product of compounding errors and will never perform at the state of the art. These systems may suite the taste of some listeners, but taste is a moving target. If a person's system is on the bright side when he or she hears an accurate system it will sound dull. If you listen carefully to the bright system the cymbals will be in your face like an ECM recording, not accurate. Not only this, but a system's characteristics change with volume. A system that sounds fine at 85 dB will sound harsh at 95dB. Then there are recordings that are mixed to various volumes. The Funkadelic recordings were mixed for high volume and sound awful at 85 dB, but turn the volume up to 95 dB and they sound great. ( for early 70's recordings)

Or could it be that the LA4 revealed a “sheen” inherent in either your source or amplifier? I suggest this possibility because I had that very experience with the LA4 until I upgraded my source (to the Electrocompaniet ECD-2).

I was telling the person who bought my LA4 today this same thing. If you hear a "sheen" or some other nastiness first assume it is another component. I replaced the LA4 with the Benchmark HPA4 preamp.  

I did this when I was trying to figure out how to drive the Yamaha NS5000 speakers. I like to use the LA4 preamp to figure things out because I feel it is not going to mess up anything.

After figuring out what amp and DAC to use with the speakers. I was getting a bit of that sheen and fatigue in the sound. I tried 2 different WyWire speaker cable, Benchmark speaker cable, and Audience AU24 SX speaker cable. All were giving that sheen or gremlins but at different frequencies.

I bit the bullet and bought Audience FrontRow and that eliminated that bit of nastiness. The LA4 did what I needed it to do. Let me hear my other gear.

The LA4 also plays nicely with about a dozen amps I have used it with. Just love this preamp. If I did not want headphone support in my big system preamp, I would have kept the LA4 and sold the Holo Audio Serene preamp. I would have been very happy with the LA4 and HPA4 in my 2 systems.

Benchmark equipment is not sterile, it is neutral, very nicely made and fairly priced. After that you can take it anywhere. Want an analog glow? Add a turntable with a tube phono stage. The difference with good electronics pales in comparison to the difference in speakers.

Benchmark amps sound quite sterile. All my SS amps from different manufacturers are way juicier (expensive and cheaper ones). I actually tried out that sterile crap and sent it back in a hurry.

ASR Golfing panther equipment --> Benchmark + Revel (oof)... That one fanatic and his reviews have brought so much sterility into the lives of many. 

or maybe many listeners just don’t like Benchmark gear...and yes, we do know how to listen and how to set up systems..

Possibly, but the impression I get is most audiophiles don’t even understand the principles of impedance matching, let alone good speaker placement or room treatments. 

I had the LA4 preamp for a brief while. At first I liked the dynamics it produced, but it was fatiguing after a while. Many people call it transparent,  but it did have a sound of it's own. Like a sheen layered over the music. Hard to describe, but in the long run, not very pleasant.

Or could it be that the LA4 revealed a “sheen” inherent in either your source or amplifier? I suggest this possibility because I had that very experience with the LA4 until I upgraded my source (to the Electrocompaniet ECD-2).

or maybe many listeners just don’t like Benchmark gear...and yes, we do know how to listen and how to set up systems..

In many instances a very neutral piece of equipment will expose deficiencies in a system. Someone with a system that is too "hot" will prefer a DAC that is rolled off.

A neutral system (flat frequency response curve) will sound too hot (sibilant) at higher volumes. This is why Loudness Compensation was so popular.

Most of the audible problems with stereos are issues of amplitude or frequency response. It only takes 0.5 dBFS at any given frequency between 100 Hz and 10 kHz to make an audible difference in sound quality. I think what we tend to do is compound errors to achieve a curve we like. You can accomplish the same thing with digital EQ and if you measure your system after you have achieved the sound you like you will be able to adjust your system to any component. This is called a target curve.   

I had the LA4 preamp for a brief while. At first I liked the dynamics it produced, but it was fatiguing after a while. Many people call it transparent,  but it did have a sound of it's own. Like a sheen layered over the music. Hard to describe, but in the long run, not very pleasant.

@yyzsantabarbara My Benchmark DAC3B is definitely too hot on the top end. I do not use it on 2-channel but on my RAAL VM-1a tube headphone amp running in Pentode mode I love the DAC3B.

I came to a similar conclusion. Had hoped to like it more on my 2ch system. Tried that dac with multiple sets of Cardas, Audioquest, Aperture, and others. No dice in my particular system. The description above by @audphile1 about his being "cool, dry, matter of fact rendition" is a great way of describing what I heard with DAC3B. Engineers there were NOT interested in hearing my feedback, in order to help suggest a different sound result or maybe trying for a different version of itself. 

  I was looking for a different type of sound and presentation. Paid off to keep trying, and the next three dacs went in a better direction for me. 

IMHO, while cables make a small difference, I like the fact that as you move up the line (Audioquest) the sounds gets better in all ways and not just good in some ways / bad in others.

Upgrades in speakers and electronics often have trade offs and a benefit in one area has some bad "side-effects" in others. Same as side-effects when taking pills.

I have learned a lot from dealers. As one told me long ago, cables, etc. should be a smaller percentage such as 10% of what you paid for speakers. if your speakers are 100K maybe 5k on Audioquest dragon makes sense.

My Benchmark DAC3B is definitely too hot on the top end. I do not use it on 2-channel but on my RAAL VM-1a tube headphone amp running in Pentode mode I love the DAC3B.

Their speaker cables running off the AHB2 are just OK. They have some issues. I replaced them with the Audience FrontRow and massive improvement. The interconnects are not that much of an issue.

@jimmy2615 Speaker cables have to be matched to purpose. There are significant design issues particularly with low impedance speakers and subwoofers. If you use a bad cable for the job like using 24 gauge zip cord to drive subwoofers you will have a pretty poor result. I am sure Benchmark would readily agree. What they would say is there are many excellent affordable cables for any purpose and there is no need to buy designer cables at ridiculous prices. The very best wire is available to all of use and we can make our own cables for pennies on the dollar. Read up on cable design. Once you understand it you can design your own. You can even get the casing to make your cables look fancy. I'm old school. To me cables are something you do not want to see. They should be hidden. Another important issue is cables should always be as short as possible which you can not do with store bought cables. When you make your own you can cut them to exact size. 

I’m a big fan of Benchmark. Great products at reasonable prices. I do however have a pair of their speaker cables here. Compared to my Cardas Clear Cygnus speaker cables, they sound dull and lifeless. So I think they should be careful about making blanket statements - and in a somewhat snide manner nonetheless.  I’d gladly pay the premium for the Cardas cables over theirs.  It is not a subtle difference and worth every penny.

I owned 2 Benchmark DACs. DAC 1 years ago and recently DAC 3 HGC. To me the benchmark sound is cool, dry, a more a matter of fact type sonic rendition of recorded music . I do agree though that the product is nicely built, rich in features and measures well. It’s priced accordingly. Just not my cup of tea. I was able to warm the DAC 3 sound with a good USB and power cables though but it didn’t do it for me. If you like it, good for you!

One other thing I will mention. When I called benchmark I spoke to a person pretty much right away. Their customer service is good. But whoever that was, I don’t remember now, recommended that I ditch my Pass Labs preamp and run the DAC 3 HGC direct to amp. I had already tried it by then and didn’t like the results. The claim was that my Pass preamp is noisy and degrades the sound quality. DAC 3 direct into amp resulted in flat, dry and forward presentation. It was significantly worse than having a preamp in the chain.
The volume control on DAC is definitely a useful feature if you’re in between preamps. But it’s not a replacement so no thanks….I like my preamp. 

Benchmark equipment is not sterile, it is neutral, very nicely made and fairly priced. After that you can take it anywhere. Want an analog glow? Add a turntable with a tube phono stage. The difference with good electronics pales in comparison to the difference in speakers. 

On another note, having spoken with them, Benchmark is heavily into digital signal processing. They are currently using a MiniDSP SHD Studio with two of their own DACs and find the combination excellent. This is a Dirac Live platform which I have tested and it is a very effective and simple to use system. It is not as flexible as higher resolution designs, but it is amazingly cost effective. The only problem with the MiniDSP SHD is the DACs are not audiophile quality. Benchmark solved that problem by choosing the Studio version and using their own DACs. 

There were many manufacturers who came out against MQA, and a few vowed to never incorporate that circuit into their equipment. I don’t remember anyone complaining about them taking a stand on that. In fact many forum members here believed them to be correct? I think manufacturers are free to voice their opinion like anyone else. Often they have a better foundational knowledge and experience to make that opinion.

I have been trialing “audiophile” balanced interconnects between my DAC, the LA4, and my amp. I had one set of Benchmark XLR’s and a set of Blue Jeans Belden’s, that I was replacing.

I use my audiophile XLR’s between my sources and my LA4. However, between my LA4 and amp I use 25-foot Benchmark XLR. When I had my AHB2 the cables did not matter too much. With my CODA #16 amp and Sanders Magtech amp I get the same impression.

There is more snake oil in the audio industry than about any other industry. Why? Because many audiophiles think music is special. When we listen, it engages our emotions and memories. Much of the hearing differences can be attributed to ’the placebo effect’. Research the use of opioids for pain - in blind studies a sugar pill gave as much pain reduction as an opioid pill, if the person believed it to be an opioid. This is what some in the audio industry prey on and use to sell products.

I have no problem with people spending THEIR OWN money. It is theirs, after all. I just use my equipment to enjoy music, whether it be a smart speaker, etc. I just want to enjoy. Too many people spend too much time trying to get it ’perfect’ - there is no such thing.

I say, take a step back, relax, and enjoy!

I have a LA4 preamp in my system and it is a solid performer, yet I am seeking to replace it as I think it is a little dry. However, to the point, I have been trialing “audiophile” balanced interconnects between my DAC, the LA4, and my amp. I had one set of Benchmark XLR’s and a set of Blue Jeans Belden’s, that I was replacing. I have tried two well known brands so far, both very different, and have one more set on deck. A friend with a very resolving system tried the same cables as I have, and independently, we have the an similar opinion of each set. 

Yes, there is snake oil out there, but not all of it.

I've never particularly liked their DAC's and Amps...it also seems very clever marketing to a different but large segment of the audiophile market, not a bold position...I would definitely consider buying their cables for a secondary system...

I disagree that as a manufacturer they shouldn’t voice an opinion.  There are plenty of manufacturers who weigh in on the opposite side, attempting to create a market for products that listeners did just fine without, such as power conditioner, ultra expensive power cords, inter connects (particularly digital) and power cords, fuses, switches, turntable mats made from lactating yaks…It’s nice to have someone on the manufacturing side call out the bs 

About what you'd expect from a company whose products sound clean, but sterile and clinical to a fault.

I have an LA4 and AHB2 fantastic combo for the money and expandable if desired. One thing about Benchmark that I like is they don’t use the word salad terms a ton of companies use. They actually test AND listen to their products and others. They can show you exactly what their components will do. Whether or not they work in a system or not is entirely dependent on the further system and the owner’s ears.

To me, the info Benchmark puts out is more than opinion, is objectively attained so to me has a bit more clout. To each their own.