Burmester 216 power amplifier Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

The Burmester 216 can be operated as a conventional two-channel amplifier or, by bridging the two output stages using the supplied adapter cable, as a monoblock. I performed a complete set of measurements in both modes on one of the review samples (serial number 9216060) with my Audio Precision SYS2722 system. I preconditioned the 216 by following the CEA's recommendation of running it in stereo mode at one-eighth the specified power into 8 ohms for 30 minutes. At the end of that time, the temperature of the top panel was 96.4°F (35.8°C) and that of the side panels 110.2°F (43.4°C).

The diagram on the amplifier's rear panel indicates that the balanced inputs are wired with pin 2 negative, the opposite of the AES standard. Consequently, the Burmester inverted absolute polarity in both stereo and mono modes. The 216's input impedance was a low 2800 ohms from 20Hz to 20kHz. The voltage gain in stereo mode at 1kHz was 31.7dB, which is equivalent to a sensitivity of 735mV input for full power. The gain in mono mode increased by just under the expected 6dB, to 37.5dB.


Fig.1 Burmester 216, mono mode, frequency response at 2.83V into: simulated loudspeaker load (gray), 8 ohms (blue), 4 ohms (magenta), and 2 ohms (red) (1dB/vertical div.).


Fig.2 Burmester 216, mono and stereo modes, small-signal 10kHz squarewave into 8 ohms.

The output impedance in stereo mode, including the series impedance of 6' of spaced-pair cable, was 0.08 ohms at 20Hz and 1kHz, 0.1 ohms at 20kHz. The mono mode impedances were similarly low. As a result, the variation in the frequency response with our standard simulated loudspeaker (fig.1, gray trace) was minimal. The response into resistive loads was flat in the audioband, not reaching –3dB until 150kHz into 8 ohms (blue) and 130kHz into 4 ohms (magenta). In mono mode, the ultrasonic response into 2 ohms (red) rolls off a little earlier than it did into higher impedances and in stereo mode, the –3dB point lying at 91kHz. With its wide small-signal bandwidth, the Burmester's reproduction of a 10kHz squarewave into 8 ohms featured very short risetimes in both modes (fig.2), with no overshoot or ringing.


Fig.3 Burmester 216, mono mode, spectrum of 1kHz sinewave, DC–1kHz, at 1Wpc into 8 ohms (linear frequency scale).

Channel separation in stereo mode (not shown) was >80dB in both directions below 1kHz and still 70dB at the top of the audioband. In stereo mode, the unweighted, wideband signal/noise ratio (ref. 1W into 8 ohms), taken with the input shorted to ground, was a superb 85.4dB in the left channel, 82.9dB in the right. These ratios respectively improved to 95.2dB and 93dB when the measurement bandwidth was restricted to the audioband, and to 98dB and 95.5dB when A-weighted. The ratios were equally superb in mono mode. Spectral analysis of the low-frequency noisefloor while the Burmester drove a 1kHz tone at 1Wpc into 8 ohms in mono mode revealed that while power supply–related spuriae at 60Hz and its harmonics were present, these all lay at or below –110dB (fig.3).


Fig.4 Burmester 216, stereo mode, distortion (%) vs 1kHz continuous output power into 8 ohms.


Fig.5 Burmester 216, stereo mode, distortion (%) vs 1kHz continuous output power into 4 ohms.

Burmester specifies the 216's maximum power in stereo mode as 100Wpc into 8 ohms (20dBW), 165Wpc into 4 ohms (19.17dBW), and 245Wpc into 2 ohms (17.9dBW). With our usual definition of clipping, which is when the THD+noise reaches 1%, the 216 met its specified power with both channels driven into both 8 ohms (fig.4) and 4 ohms (not shown). I didn't examine the clipping power into 2 ohms, as Jim Austin hadn't finished his auditioning and this sample had to be returned to him. (Amplifiers sometimes break when driving their maximum power into 2 ohms, which is why I usually leave this test to last.)


Fig.6 Burmester 216, mono mode, distortion (%) vs 1kHz continuous output power into 8 ohms.


Fig.7 Burmester 216, mono mode, distortion (%) vs 1kHz continuous output power into 4 ohms.

In mono mode, the Burmester clipped at 330Wpc into 8 ohms (25.19dBW, fig.5) and 500Wpc into 4 ohms (24dBW, fig.6).


Fig.8 Burmester 216, mono mode, THD+N (%) vs frequency at 20V into: 8 ohms (blue), 4 ohms (magenta), and 2 ohms (gray).

Even at high powers, the distortion below waveform clipping in figs.4–6 was very low. I examined how the percentage of THD+N varied with frequency at 20V, which is equivalent to 50W into 8 ohms, 100W into 4 ohms, and 200W into 2 ohms in both stereo (not shown) and mono (fig.7) modes. The THD+N percentage was higher into 2 ohms (red trace) than it was into the higher impedances (blue and magenta traces), but was still low. The increase in THD+N in the top audio octaves will be due to the usual limitation in open-loop bandwidth reducing the amount of corrective negative feedback available.


Fig.9 Burmester 216, stereo mode, 1kHz waveform at 50W into 8 ohms, 0.00127% THD+N (top); distortion and noise waveform with fundamental notched out (bottom, not to scale).


Fig.10 Burmester 216, mono mode, 1kHz waveform at 50W into 8 ohms, 0.00194% THD+N (top); distortion and noise waveform with fundamental notched out (bottom, not to scale).

The distortion waveform in stereo mode was predominantly the second harmonic (fig.8—I had to average 64 captures to reduce the level of the random noise to the point where the waveform of the distortion became clear.). However, spikes occur at the sinewave crossover points, and these were more fully developed at the same power in mono mode (fig.9).


Fig.11 Burmester 216, stereo mode, spectrum of 1kHz sinewave, DC–10kHz, at 50W into 8 ohms (linear frequency scale).


Fig.12 Burmester 216, mono mode, spectrum of 1kHz sinewave, DC–10kHz, at 50Wpc into 8 ohms (left channel blue, right red; linear frequency scale).


Fig.13 Burmester 216, mono mode, HF intermodulation spectrum, DC–30kHz, 19+20kHz at 40W peak into 4 ohms (linear frequency scale).

These spikes correlate with the presence of higher-order harmonics, which can be seen in spectra taken in both stereo (fig.10) and mono (fig.11) modes. Even so, the levels of the fifth and higher harmonics were extremely low, at close to –110dB (0.0003%). Intermodulation distortion was also very low, the 1kHz difference product resulting from an equal mix of 19 and 20kHz tones at 40W peak into 4 ohms lying at –104dB (0.0006%, fig.12). The rise in distortion in the top octaves seen in fig.7 results in higher-order intermodulation making an appearance in this graph, but the highest in level of these still lay at –90dB (0.003%).

The Burmester 216 offers very low distortion and noise and won't be fazed by having to drive low impedances.—John Atkinson

COMPANY INFO
Burmester Audiosysteme GmbH
Wilhelm-Kabus-Strasse 47
10829 Berlin
Germany
mail.burmester.de
+49 307879 68 0
ARTICLE CONTENTS

COMMENTS
georgehifi's picture

"I didn't examine the clipping power into 2 ohms, as Jim Austin hadn't finished his auditioning and this sample had to be returned to him. (Amplifiers sometimes break when driving their maximum power into 2 ohms, which is why I usually leave this test to last.)"

I love class-A/B reviews because they are representative of what's coming out of the speaker terminal to go to the speakers, there's no concealment of some of the measurements/tests in them, but looking at those figures and graphs JA, I doubt very much the 2ohm test if you did do them, they wouldn't have been something to write home about for those kind of big $'s.

As far as doing any good (like other similar price amps can) into very low impedances say like the Wilson Alexia's .9ohm EPDR bass loading, I'd say most probably nah, there's far better for that spec and cheaper! Unless!!! those specs you measured were in bridged mode?, then those figures are to be expected.

Cheers George

Bonsai's picture

This unfortunately is the problem with this industry:-

‘Getting noticed by a critic for a well-known hi-fi magazine is, as we all know, the key to success in this industry.’

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture

what products are being criminally overlooked by "well known hi-fi magazines? Please elaborate instead of making cynical vague comments.

JRT's picture

"(W)hat products are being ... overlooked by "well known hi-fi magazines?" - JohnnyThunder2.0

Buckeye Amplifiers seem to be providing very good performance/price in their direct marketed class D amplifiers. Their existance has not likely escaped notice of those paying much attention to that market segment. Have you seen any review of their products in any print magazine?

For example:

Hypex NCx500 monoblock amplifier ($750/each).
https://www.buckeyeamp.com/shop/p/hypex-ncx500-amplifier-monoblock

Purifi 1ET7040SA v2 monoblock amplifier ($950/each)
https://www.buckeyeamp.com/shop/p/purifi-1et7040sa-mono-channel-amplifier

Purifi 1ET400A monoblock amplifier ($750/each)
https://www.buckeyeamp.com/shop/p/purifi-1et400a-amplifier-mono-channel

As always, this is not SPAM, as I have no affiliation with the sellers, and have no financial interest in it.

Glotz's picture

Burmester has been marketing for a very long time, hence our awareness.

georgehifi's picture

"Getting noticed by a critic for a well-known hi-fi magazine is, as we all know, the key to success in this industry."

Yes it comes 2 ways, and comes on it's own merits/reputation by word of mouth also.

My "Lightspeed Attenuator" passive pre (now sold off) no one knew about outside Australia. It was noticed back in 2009 by Sam Tellig, so I sent him one for evaluation, he loved it so much he bought it, (trade price naturally) and one for his son. It made it into 2010 April issue "Stereophile's Recommended Components"

Cheers George

hb72's picture

apologies..

kai's picture

“I didn't examine the clipping power into 2 ohms, as Jim Austin hadn't finished his auditioning and this sample had to be returned to him. (Amplifiers sometimes break when driving their maximum power into 2 ohms, which is why I usually leave this test to last.)“

Seems you did it, kind of, and the 216 didn‘t break:

500 W mono into 4 Ohm for the amp is the same stress as 2x250 W stereo into 2 Ohm.

The only difference, the power supply rails are loaded more evenly in mono, as each amp takes from the opposite rail at each given moment.

georgehifi's picture

Tested 165Wpc into 4 ohms, the "2ohm scenario of 2 x 250W stereo" into 2 ohm", is a far cry from (good current ability stereo amp) being able to almost doubling the 4ohm figure of 165w to 330w for 2ohm loading.
Still says it's not the best stereo amp (especially in bridged mono mode) for speakers like the Alexia which have an EPDR of .9ohm in the bass.
Means to me, it's current ability is limited into speakers with low impedance bass, compared to other amps in the $35k price bracket.

Cheers George

kai's picture

Continuous power into low Ohm might even be limited by the PSU’s power capability, not the output’s current limitations.

In this case short term peak power (not measured), more relevant for music, can be very significantly higher.

The manufacturer claims:
“The 216 helps even speakers with the lowest impedance values and complex loads achieve a spacious sound image with superior dynamics.”

“Stable at all loads over the entire frequency range.”
….
“Pulse Power in stereo (CEA) per channel, 2 Ohm: 360 W.”

This last figure tells, the amp is not current limiting.

German rules for manufacturers claims are quite strict, so I’d believe they are true.

Ortofan's picture

... a PSU that will allow it to produce about double its 4Ω peak power output into a 2Ω load?

Consider the $1,599 Rotel RB-1582 Mk II.
According to a Hi-Fi News test of the Mk I version, the peak output capability was 295W @ 8Ω, 555W @ 4Ω, 1005W @ 2Ω, and 1,630W @ 1Ω.

https://rotel.com/product/rb-1582-mkii

https://www.soundstageaccess.com/index.php/equipment-reviews/533-rotel-rb-1582-mkii-stereo-power-amplifier

-OR-

For $1,199, on closeout, one could choose the NAD C 275BEE.
According to a Hi-Fi News test, the peak output capability was 300W @ 8Ω, 585W @ 4Ω, 1,060W @ 2Ω, and 1,555W @ 1Ω.

https://nadelectronics.com/product/c-275bee-stereo-power-amplifier/\

https://www.soundstageaccess.com/index.php/equipment-reviews/649-nad-c-275bee-stereo-mono-amplifier

Bonsai's picture

It is very easy to produce specs like this, in which there is perfect doubling of power with each halving of load impedance.

Step 1: measure the amp output into 2 Ohms and note it.
Step 2: double the load resistance and confirm the output power is precisely half that measured in Step 1. It almost always is.
Step 3: finally, double the load impedance to 8 Ohms, and confirm it is half that of the 4 ohm case and confirm it is 1/4 that of step 1.
Step 4: if you aren’t getting a doubling of power with each halving of load resistance, go back to step 1 and derate the lowest load resistance output power and repeat steps 1 - 4

You can now go to market saying you have a near perfect power supply + amplifier system.

David Harper's picture

..."that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" - Christopher Hitchens.

Laphr's picture

..."Prove all my assumptions for me or I'll throw a tantrum" - Troll

Ortofan's picture

... what is the length of the shortest peak level that it can hold and display?

Also. what is the maximum dynamic range of the music JA2 listens to?

In the following video, Harbeth Monitor 40.1 speakers are driven by CH Precision amplifiers. The test music used is Laptev Sea by Pan Sonic.
Note that the peak reading on the power meter often exceeds 500W and occasionally over 700W.
The 40.1 is less efficient than JA2's Wilson speakers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3WpRY-EtX8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhuJxdaU87I

georgehifi's picture

That's just a bit more wattage that's needed with those, and they are miles more easier to drive than the Alexia's, the impedance barley dips below 6ohms compared to the Alexia .9ohms!!!! and that's where you need big current, and not so much wattage.
https://tinyurl.com/yu696j3o

Cheers George

X