Unboxing the $150,000US Audio Note Ongaku

[Richard Austen]

You gotta love the cheap ass box it comes in. Still, the best-sounding integrated amplifier I have auditioned. Not the top of the line anymore - the Legend runs $850,000 or so. I need a new job. Still, I enjoyed my audition on Monday with the 300B Meishu Tonmeister (~9k) basic model. The Meishu runs $9k-25k depending on version and is the number one selling Audio Note amplifier that was designed by Guy Adams of Voyd Turntables for Audio Note. The Tonmeister is the newer version and uses the Ongaku Power supply design. I have never been a fan of the 300B until the Tonmeister finding the 300B a little too soft and vague and completely ill-suited for rock - the Tonmeister fixes all that. Interestingly, the dealer prefers the basic version to the more expensive silver version because while the silver has more hi-fi strengths - air and separation - it loses some of the midrange magic. I will be comparing the Meishu Tonmesiter integrated to the M6 Preamp(which I own) with a P3 Silver Tonemsiter (which is the power amp version of the Meishu Tonmeister). And also against the Jinro which is the Copper version (and dramatically less expensive version) of the Ongaku.

The dealer in Hong Kong
Speakers (don't need corners). AN E/SPE HE Hemp (HE=High Efficiency, SPE = the silver cable used internally, Hemp = woofer cone material)
CD player used is the CD 4.1x which houses the CDT Two/II Transport (A Philips Pro 2LF) and DAC 2.1x (non-oversampling DAC 1865N) with valve power supplies $13,000. The new CD 5.1 ($35k) was sold out. I am still kind of amazed that people are still buying $13k CD players um $35k CD players - still they are quite special.
I own the same TT3 turntable and PSU1 power supply(bottom right)
Mesihu Tonmeister on floor front right
Jinro on floor front left
Cables are all Lexus copper - Not too pricey for AN - Biwired (Fairly sure they would be under $800).

The unboxing video for the Ongaku

 

[kray]

For a $220,000 amp, you'd expect a much higher level of packaging. Like a customized pelican case or something. you're playing with fire shipping it in such a flimsy box.

 

[prime minister]

Geez, that packaging is awful. I would never ship in just that. For $200k, they could drop $100 into boxes.

 

[Richard Austen]

My AN Arm 3 Tonearm came in a better box - lol. I'm fairly sure the boxes come in pallets to the dealers - but the customer takes home this cheap box. Next time I am at the dealer here I will ask - the guys in the video are not getting this shipped from AN but got it from the showrunner at the Toronto Audio Show. I mean - if you're paying $220,000 you'd pay $221,000 for the amp in a super-premium box would you not? But that's Peter. If there is a no-frills option he'll take it. I mean the remote controls he offers up are absurdly pedestrian (a nice word for cheap). But I they work. Still, my $2200 HKD CD Player from Line Magnetic was a brushed aluminum remote that would break your toe. The $35k USD AN CD 5.1 comes with a plastic remote

Line Magnbetic CD215 ($2200HKD)

 

[paul_b]

Did that amp come that way from a normal carrier or on a pallet off the back of a truck?

 

[Richard Austen]

Did that amp come that way from a normal carrier or on a pallet off the back of a truck?

I am assuming they are shipped by sea on pallets as I saw a big stack of Meishu amplifiers at the Hong Kong dealer. It reminds me of my Line Magnetic 219IA - the thing was in a box inside a crate. But as a customer buying from a dealer you would just get the box, not the crate.

This dealer in the video was getting the gear from a dealer(or importer) from an audio show. Still, I think the point is the box could be better - while the price goes up to the consumer as the customer pays for the packaging.

 

[threequid]

When they have the little post-it notes on the boxes, it means it was palletized. I’ve seen my dealer receive their AN orders on pallets
, each box with a handwritten post-it note of what’s inside the cheap box lol

 

[asilker]

Slightly off topic, but I'm always surprised that AN runs AD1865 chips in their dacs. I run an AD1862, so I do enjoy that family of chips, but the AD1865 runs lower voltage, combined power supplies, and has an internal op amp for I/V so it's voltage out.

So it's interesting to me that AN does all of this SET and silver wiring stuff, specific crossover caps, and upstream we're working with integrated op amps that are dead stock. If nothing else I think that speaks to the value of contemporary op amps.

EDITING: as Richard remarks below, the AD1865 is sometimes run in a current-out configuration in the AN dacs.

 

[prime minister]

Slightly off topic, but I'm always surprised that AN runs AD1865 chips in their dacs. I run an AD1862, so I do enjoy that family of chips, but the AD1865 runs lower voltage, combined power supplies, and has an internal op amp for I/V so it's voltage out.

So it's interesting to me that AN does all of this SET and silver wiring stuff, specific crossover caps, and upstream we're working with integrated op amps that are dead stock. If nothing else I think that speaks to the value of contemporary op amps.

It's surprising, and disappointing, that they would even use op amps.

 

[JP]

It's surprising, and disappointing, that they would even use op amps.

Why?

 

[Wntrmute2]

It's surprising, and disappointing, that they would even use op amps.

I find it surprising and disappointing that anyone charges over $200,000 for ANY piece of audio equipment.

 

[paul_b]

I will play devil's advocate on the packaging. If you own one of these and you want to sell it/ship it, you can put it back on that box, strap it to a pallet, then have it trucked to its new owner.

Something this large and that needs this level of insurance won't be shippable by UPS, FedEx, or the Post Office, so what's the point in even providing a shipping box?

While it would be possible to provide a crate, that crate would either need to be designed to be lifted by a forklift, or strapped to a pallet anyway for individual transport.

If I had to buy one of these, I would be most confident having it in that factory box and perfectly centered on a 4'x4' pallet. There's no way a freight company is going to stack anything on top of that cardboard box!

 

[Wntrmute2]

I find it surprising and disappointing that anyone charges over $200,000 for ANY piece of audio equipment.

Actually, I find it surprising and disappointing that anyone feels the need to purchase any piece of audio gear at those kind of prices. IMHO of course.

 

[asilker]

It's surprising, and disappointing, that they would even use op amps.

I'll just speak for myself and say that I really like op amps, and I think they can sound great

But yeah it kind of goes against the grain of their brand identity

 

[Richard Austen]

Slightly off topic, but I'm always surprised that AN runs AD1865 chips in their dacs. I run an AD1862, so I do enjoy that family of chips, but the AD1865 runs lower voltage, combined power supplies, and has an internal op amp for I/V so it's voltage out.

So it's interesting to me that AN does all of this SET and silver wiring stuff, specific crossover caps, and upstream we're working with integrated op amps that are dead stock. If nothing else I think that speaks to the value of contemporary op amps.

I spoke to Peter and Andy Grove about this at the airport in Hong Kong - they were flying out back to the UK and I live near the airport so popped by for a chat. I asked about DAC chips and rest assured they have tried ALL of them - all the new ones all the old ones. In the case of the entry-level model, they use the TDA 1543 and Peter noted that they slightly prefer the TDA 1541 but it was mostly a supply issue and being able to service their DACs. Sometimes they have to do a second choice. This was the case with the AN K/Spe speakers I owned back in 2003 - they used rubber surrounds back then. Peter said that this was a compromise because at the time - to get foam - he needed to buy 500 of them and the K wasn't a big enough seller to put the cash out for them. Over time things changed and now he has finally been able to get foam surrounds - and the new AN K is dramatically better than the K I owned. Indeed, a current K/Lx sounds much better than my older K/Spe (which is the higher mode). What I gathered from our conversation is that Audio Note doesn't let on what exactly is the thing that is most important in their DACS. Everyone talks about DAC Chips for example but that's not "really" what makes the DAC sound as good as they sound. Otherwise, the many other brands who used the TDA 1543 or 1865 would sound as good - and they don't.

Audio Note has been working on new DACs - they have spent some years on a resister ladder DAC and almost brought them out but are now onto a MaSC DAC design.

I suppose, being a reviewer, I should care more about the technology but I really only reverse care. What I mean is that I audition the gear and I want to largely be "blind" to the technology when I listen - I don't want my preconceived past experience bias to come into play too much. What I have largely done is listen and say "does this sound like the artist is in the room?" and "Does this move me" if the answer is yes then I'll look at the design. Sometimes I see the correlation to what I consider to be the best sounding stuff - NOS filterless DACs - a testament might be how so many companies have copied Audio Note over the years. Some companies like SW1X Audio almost outright. They buy AN Transformers/caps/knobs/connectors/wiring.resistors for their amps for example. They even have levels! Many other companies buy Audio Note Transformers for their amps (hush hush).

If you are interested in the technical questions to put to AN - You should try the thread on the Steve Hoffman forums as it is designed for AN fans - dealers and very occasionally Peter Qvortrup will respond. This is the second part Strictly for fans of Audio Note UK (all things Audio Note UK) PART TWO

 

[Richard Austen]

Audio Note developed their own I/V transformers in their DACs

And ANKits 5.1

 

[asilker]

Richard, you're right it does appear they pull current out from pins 4 and 21 and convert with a proprietary transformer. It would be cool to be able to wind, wind, rewind your own transformers until you had a device that worked exactly how you wanted with a given chip. pretty cool. I don't doubt these DAC's sound good, although I've never heard one.

My intent isn't to disparage AN - I appreciate when simple things are done well. But I am more interested in basic tinkering and DIY as a hobbyist so I'm just saying that there's not really any magic part here, just consistently thoughtful gestalt. There are other ways to make great sounding DACs or amps too, and if you don't mind spending time and learning, many folks can build themselves. On the same side of the coin, if you're using multipin chips to make something that sounds great you could also speculate that well executed class D amps or other delta-sigma dacs could sound similarly wonderful if folks would spend painstaking time dialing in power supplies and other scaffolding.

I will say though, I think AN may be aware that the average buyer isn't totally aware of how everything fits together so instead of saying "it's an old AD1865 chip, hey by the way these have an NE5532 in them so you can just run voltage right out if you want", they say "In a resistor ladder architecture precision laser trimmed resistors are used for each digital bit in order to create the analog voltage from a passive circuit", which makes a simple old chip sound like some audio explorer had to set up a laser trimming operation. In reality, Analog Devices, Phillips, and everyone else who's ever made a DIP chip is using laser trimmed resistors in every op amp. Laser trimming is also how processors are made.

 

[asilker]

One more comment here from me, sorry all to derail the thread this way.

Richard, read through some of your reviews and I'm still chewing on the AN designs here. The DAC 0.1x uses the TDA1543 chip which (I checked lol) is a 16 bit chip in a dip8 package that only has options for voltage out, not current out. So we've established that the unit at the bottom of the lineup does indeed use an integrated op amp, and the unit at the top uses transformers for I/V. All of the DACs in between those use chips which have an option for integrated op amp use. So I don't know. Seems like a lot of cash in a scenario where a company isn't too excited about telling me what's actually in their device.

 

[Richard Austen]

One more comment here from me, sorry all to derail the thread this way.

Richard, read through some of your reviews and I'm still chewing on the AN designs here. The DAC 0.1x uses the TDA1543 chip which (I checked lol) is a 16 bit chip in a dip8 package that only has options for voltage out, not current out. So we've established that the unit at the bottom of the lineup does indeed use an integrated op amp, and the unit at the top uses transformers for I/V. All of the DACs in between those use chips which have an option for integrated op amp use. So I don't know. Seems like a lot of cash in a scenario where a company isn't too excited about telling me what's actually in their device.

I don't think too many audio companies (like none of them) really want to tell everyone else what they're doing. They are a business and they have to try and make money. DIYer's never factor in their own time as a $ per hour or the money they put into their equipment. So I am a high school teacher in Hong Kong and if I were to charge an hourly rate as a tutor I would charge $200 USD per hour.

That would include the time it would take me to read and learn about DAC design. I'd need to buy all the parts to build the DAC 0.1x and all the tools to make one. When I bought it, it was $1500. Could I do all of the above in 7-8 hours?

On the one hand, manufacturers are at a disadvantage - they have to sell a "repeatable" product with consistent parts from unit to unit and pass various safety standards. They have to factor in x margin for profit, warranty coverage, shipping and of course keeping the price to a point where people will still buy the thing. The DAC 0.1X came out around the year 2000. They've been selling now for over 20 years. Could it be better? Yes, that's why they sell a 1.1, 2.1 etc. Could it be bettered at $1500 by a competitor or a DIYer? Maybe but then sound quality is somewhat subjective.

So the only way to find out specific questions on a design choice would really have to be put to Peter Qvortrup's design team - Andy Grove designed their DACs - you could shoot them an e-mail and see what info they will give out in the contact us tab

I say this because IMO - it's better to talk to people like Andy who actually design the stuff and have degrees in the related field who may be able to explain why they chose to use X over Y in a design.
DAC0.1x | Audio Note (UK)

 

[asilker]

I'm just saying I think there's a difference between disclosing a schematic (most companies don't do for obvious reasons) vs misleading marketing where a company's brand identity doesn't merge with a design concept (like op amps) so they specifically just don't mention it and instead portray it as "precision laser etching"

I think that type of communication can be purposefully vague because, like you said, it's not practical for most people to read a spec sheet and build stuff