Solid State Power Amp Reviews

Again, JA1 becomes a part of a company's QC department. Seems like it is happening too often, as at these prices once is too often. I do feel bad writing this as there are owners who are left unaware.

That was not the best ever? At some point a peak of perfection must be reached with no point in continuing. How do four defective examples escape QC?

But don't take my word for it. Read the experts:

JVS:"I've heard few amplifiers I've been as eager to return to time and time again as the Infigo Method 3 monoblocks."

BUT WAIT. What's this?

JA1: "The 6dB [gain] shortfall with the balanced connection was likely due to the XLR plug's pin 3 not being connected to anything."

AND

"It appears that all four samples of Infigo's Method 3 amplifier had a manufacturing defect that disabled class-A operation."

And, finally, in the "Truer words were never spoken" dept.:
JA2:"Whenever a designer claims to be doing something fundamentally new—like "low-temperature class-A"—it makes one suspicious. "

Hmm the invention of class A Amplifier that actually operates as class a/b. Genius. I’ve never herd this amp but the review reminds me of the story of the emperors new clothes.

Personally I understand QC can go south and the last minute adjustments can havoc things. But, you knew they were going to Stereophile but didn't do the final test before putting into the shipping container? If so, what kind of QC can a regular customer expected? More importantly, are you going to call everyone who already purchased it and offer free service? I failed to read it on your response. I urge you to reach out to everyone who may already have it and offer a free service.

"XLR plug's pin 3 not being connected to anything". This may be a bigger issue in my regard. Because this is not a QC problem. This is a core engineering problem. Based on the review, yet it appears that you produced a beautiful sounding amp. I personally feel sad such tragic things happened on your first Stereohile review. But, I urge you to the right thing by fixing every amps which are already in shops and homes, not just what's in your factory. This way, I hope you can rebuild the reputation.

For such a premium product they could have had at least spent a bit of money on design: this thing looks horrible (like a heating radiator).

1.) I could never be a reviewer and expect to hear the small differences people claim they can hear. 2.) Every reviewer has their own pet speakers that they are use to hearing, yet some claim reviewed amps are state of the art in comparison, but have a hard time hearing malfunctions at low volumes. 3.) It is hard to believe that these manufacturers do not have the same testing protocols that JA1 has and used all the time.

I feel for reviewers, but it may be time for testing to be done first and if the gear is found defective sent back and no review printed. This would be a radical change at Stereophile but might be due consideration. Broken products returned would lead to that the manufacturer not being allowed to resubmit any products for one full year.

The other dangerous issue is reviewers who rate products, but have no testing gear and cannot inform the audience of any sonic issues just by "listening" to said gear. Much money is often at stake here.

Hans Looman proudly boasts about his connection to Resonessence Labs in his website
.I am one of probably hundreds of customers who were left high and dry by Resonssense Labs when they abruptly closed down .
I was the owner of the $5000.00 Reasonesence Invicta DAC . After noticing that Reasonesence Labs was offering upgrades to my DAC to “Invicta Pro “ status from the standard Invicta version at a cost of $1000.00 I happily sent my DAC in and $1000.00 for the upgrade .
10 days later I received my upgraded DAC back . Unfortunately, after just a couple of weeks after receiving my upgraded DAC back I started having problems with display .

I contacted Reasonesence Labs immediately only to discover that they had closed down ! There was no explanation given . Phones were disconnected - email address deactivated . Nor did not offer any information on their websites for the owners of their products who had spent thousands of their hard earned $$$ as to how they could at least have their expensive Resonessence products repaired in the future . Nothing ! They just disappeared.
I was stuck with a just upgraded $6000.00 DAC that stopped working properly after only a week.

I would never have sent Reasonesence Labs my $1000.00 upgrade if I had known that they would shut down just a few couple weeks later ! They were ethically obligated imo to have informed me before I invested a $1000.00 for their upgrade. An upgrade that turned out to be faulty
Resonessence took my $1000.00 for the upgrade knowing very well that they would be going out of business shortly afterwards . Very unethical business practices - a cash grab .

Last year I noticed Hans Looman had started a new audio company . He proudly advertises his previous connection with Resonessence Labs on his website !

Over the last year I’ve emailed and left voicemail messages for Hans Looman many times politely asking him if he could please just recommend someone who could help me get my Invicta DAC repaired. He has never once had the courtesy to return my emails or my phone calls .

I realize company’s go out of business - but the way Resonessence continued to take money for upgrades from their customers knowing full well they were going out of business is deplorable.

"En fuego" would be a more appropriate name for this company.

This is a good example of why "high end" audio is such a joke. 55K for a component that doesn't actually do anything other than impress silly audiophiles because it's so expensive. In addition to being profoundly ugly it doesn't even work properly. All together now.... PLACEBO!!!!!

This article and the comments haven't really reduced my confusion. I am not in the market for a new amp, but always enjoys reading about what's new and out there. Assuming that a SP review is basically one and done (notwithstanding any follow-ups buried in the back of the magazine) I am mystified as to why the amp being reviewed isn't the final design lent out with a bow on top. Further, I am always confused when one is reviewed that has defects or flaws (that didn't happen in transit). I realize that nascent companies may not have the financial resources to produce numerous products and, in this case, there may only be a few amps in existence, but I would think it would spend time on the bench getting a once-over before the review.

So when I read the manufacturer's comments I scratch my head. Comments like "we thank John Atkinson for uncovering some things that will lead to demonstrable improvements." Is this still a work in progress or an evolving product?

"Scrutinizing the bias circuit to find and fix what caused those issues revealed a small undershoot..." again, is this a final product at $55k or a WIP?

"Thanks to John's input, we are incorporating a redesign of the topology of the bias circuit that is free of this anomaly..." again.. and a "redesign of the topology"???

Sounds like a WIP. It's galling that it should command a price tag like that. Presumably we are talking about a bunch of solid state analog and digital circuits and a box, so the NEW thing, the thing that commands the premium, is the design; something that is perfectly articulated by the designer, conceived, built and tested. Yet the design appears to be in flux. Yeah, I don't get it.

... an outfit with no track record when there are excellent products available from other well-established companies? Indeed, you could buy one each of the following two-channel amplifiers and still not have spent $55K.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/nad-c-298-power-amplifier

https://www.stereophile.com/content/benchmark-media-systems-ahb2-power-amplifier

https://www.stereophile.com/content/parasound-halo-21-power-amplifier

https://www.stereophile.com/content/rotel-michi-s5-power-amplifier

https://www.stereophile.com/content/mcintosh-laboratory-mc462-power-amplifier

https://www.stereophile.com/content/luxman-m-10x-power-amplifier

I read the review by JVS and afterwards the findings by JA. All I can say is thank goodness for JA’s work.
These amps are clearly a ‘home made’ product from a fellow who is probably working out of his garage.
Nothing wrong in that, but let’s get real on the price!
For the ask, I think one can reasonably expect a level of QC that is far above what these ‘prototypes’ offer. As to the JVS review, well it is another one of those…if you don’t experience the product yourself in your system, you only have yourself to blame by going by what this chap reports.

I've been offline at a family wedding in the Bay Area. Having now read the comments, I'm glad I could enjoy the wedding in peace.

I never thought I'd find myself agreeing with Archimago. But as the one person (besides me and Hans) who heard the Infigos before posting a comment to this review, he wrote, "I heard the Method 3 at Pacific Audio Fest in 2022 and thought they sounded excellent with the Alta Audio Adam speakers."

The pair of Method 3s many audiophiles heard at shows was the same pair I reviewed. Except for their bass, which lacked the solidity and color I expect, they sounded as good in my system as they did at the two or three audio shows where I heard them. (I tried to get into the Infigo room at AXPONA 2023 to write a show report, but the positive buzz around them was so strong that the room was too packed to afford a decent listen.) In the lighting used in the rooms I did manage to visit on other occasions, the amps looked as good as they did in my listening room. But I listen in low light where the blue glow emanating from their transparent covers was quite enticing. I'm sorry that black and white photos do not present them in the best possible light, as it were.

I was in shock when, after I had submitted my review, I learned of the Method 3's faulty construction and inability to perform according to spec. I remain mystified as to how monoblocks that did not perform as they were intended managed to sound as fine as the Infigos did at shows and in my listening room. All I can do is repeat what most Stereophile reviewers say time and time again (and which a lot of posters clearly don't accept): specs ≠ sound.

I am beyond eager to hear a correctly assembled pair of Method 3s in my listening room. If the sound remains as good as before but the bass gains in solidity and focus because of higher output power and true class-A operation, I expect they will be a knockout. Until then, I am not going to engage in back and forths with people who have never heard these amps in person. Life is too short, and I'm short enough as it is.

jason

Thanks Jason...
I am very sorry that all of this happened the way it did, and once again, I take full responsibility for this and stand by the line in the comment that any equipment that goes out of our factory will meet specifications.
I am looking forward to getting you and John a new pair of Method 3s.
I fully agree: specs ≠ sound - but promised specs need to be met.

Hans.

"Rather quickly, Editor Jim Austin suggested I review the Method 3."

"It appears that all four samples of Infigo's Method 3 amplifier had a manufacturing defect that disabled class-A operation"

Maybe Stereophile needs to have a policy that they will only fully review equipment (especially like very expensive $55K mono amps, et al!) once it has come to market, rather than letting consumers assume it has and be beta testers for that gear, in this case seeming to be prototypes!. All four samples were defective! How can that possibly happen if a manufacturer has their act together? If I had bought these based on a review, only to learn of this problem, I would be absolutely furious. The mea culpas from the manufacturer are weak.

I would be shocked if something like this ever happened with much less expensive Schiit Audio, for example (and I don't own their gear). I've seen videos and read interviews about their manufacturing and excellent quality control. I have a modest but well-reviewed Odyssey Audio amp (a Jon Valin top budget pick), and I know builder Klaus Bunge would never let this happen, and would be embarrassed to his core if it had.

Is justifying an issue like these amps had really the way to go? As the poster above stated, if he, or for that matter, anyone else, had bought these amps for the price asked and found these issues, they would be furious. IMO, rightly so.
The question that could, and maybe should, be asked is…would it not be prudent for a few protocols to be enacted? Firstly, it would seem to be appropriate for any manufacturer to bench test their gear to make sure it is performing as advertised before sending anywhere for reviews.Secondly, it would seem to make sense that JA might consider measuring the gear before a reviewer lays his hands on it…that way the kind of surprise that JVS received would be less likely. A faulty product could then be sent back before review.
Sound does not equate to measurements, but what the manufacturer correctly states…for a lot of folks, a product needs to meet its advertised specs. The higher the price asked, the more imperative this is.

daveyf :" it would seem to make sense that JA might consider measuring the gear before a reviewer lays his hands on it…"

Now that's a great way to do things JA, what about it???

Cheers George

Listen and report, then measure seems great.

Otherwise, JA would just be sending the crap back and we'd never hear about an issue and its sonic correlation.

There is not even any need for the follow up review at this point, we have seen it with past reviews: "Everything I said remains true, only even more so now."

'Just sniff it and move on,' as my dog tells me when I go to pick up its poop on a walk.

I like this way because it shows us that we are mere humans; and it is a bit amusing because audiophiles who say they can hear beyond what can be measured get a chance to stand there with their pants down while JA shows us that either 1) we are sometimes fooling ourselves, or 2) those stupid objective tests don't catch the essence of a product even when it is broken.

This way is more fun.

..move on.

Nah!! it really needs to be thrashed out.
As it happens now nearly every second or third review!!!.
And what happens if it's a "good subjective review" because of "whatever", and then the impressed reader doesn't read the measurements because he/she has no idea how to interpret JA's measurements, he/she can end up buying a lemon of a product, that has no re-sale value because of the bad measurements caused by design faults or whatever before being sent for detailed subjective/objective review.

Cheers George

After reading all the wildly negative comments here, I thought I would offer my experiential $.02 based on actually listening to actual and real Infigo product. Last June, I attended the Lone Star Audio Fest and Infigo had a room featuring their Method 6 stereo amplifier and Method 4 dac, driving a lovely pair of Rosso Fiorentino Volterra speakers (and associated cabling, of course). This was, by far, the best sound of the show but that is not what really struck me, as fantastic sounding as it was. What really stood out to me was the noise floor (or really lack thereof). I've never experienced such a void behind, below and between the music - the mental image that came immediately to mind was a vast black, noiseless chasm that almost gave me vertigo! It is a phenomenon that is really hard to explain but is readily apparent once one hears it (or, more accurately, does not hear it).

I cannot say how that specific equipment measured but I know how it sounded and I was very, very impressed (the Volterras were no slouch either). Impressed enough that I am seriously weighing the need for two kidneys. Based on that presentation, I believe Mr. Looman is onto something special (it did not hurt that his lovely assistant played just about anything I asked her!).

While the question of value differs for each of us, the price point that these amps has been offered at lets one look at a number of competitors. Personally, I would not touch an amp that is constructed so that it is unable to drive a variety of speakers at the price asked. These amps, even if they sound good to one listener at a show, are not a product that would give a consumer confidence. I think one of the interesting arbiters of gear, and many will disagree here, is how well the product holds up on the secondary market, price wise. Should be interesting to see how these amps do?

This product is a Canadian made product, but to sell it in the USA, you need to list the specs of the amp at 8 ohms (NOT 4) RMS and across the entire audio frequency range (20-20K) and at what distortion level. Thus, your 250 watts may actually turn out to 125 RMS w/ch with both channels driven at .08% distortion (just a guess at the distortion level) across the full audio range! If my guess is correct, and the amp only produces half of what you are advertising, who would pay such a high cost for a medioric amp?

Amp needs a total redesign ..... !

The End ..

Reading measurements is always somewhat a YA or NA specifically when the objectives vs subjectives poor their options into the subject matter. Usually I dismiss those ones as members of the YA vs NA when measurements produce some sort higher or lower numbers that some will call out on.
But, a manufacturer that sells a &50,000. Amplifier who sends it out for the world to hear and doesn’t have his shit together first; that’s is totally unacceptable. Just think if you’re the purchaser off of this amp and run into these issues after your investment. That’s not what this hobby should be about: it should make you happy not sad!

A manufacturer knows that JA measures most review equipment so I am incredulous that you would not measure what is being sent to ensure it is working! A well established manufacturer should be able to pull a piece from inventory and check the production test report. A new company can't do that but why-oh-why not hand measure the sample as a pre-review check? The words 'roost', 'home', 'to', 'coming' and 'chickens' spring to mind. And, JA-classic was told it was a manufacturing issue but the designer comments suggest it a design flaw that was not worked out.
Qudos to JA-classic for not giving the design a hard time but the reviewers, whose reviews would have been pre-biased (pun intended) to think the product was class-A, must be pissed.

This is one of those times where measurements do help in finding something to be resolved, and looks like an issue is now fully known about and already corrected. But the real reason for all the drama is the simple fact that Infigo amps sound fantastic, truly fantastic. I heard the Method-3 monoblocks and Method-6 stereo amps at multiple hi-fi shows, and the Infigo/Alta rooms really stood out as some of the best sounding rooms. The amps sounded ultra-clean and ultra-smooth, and are definitely worth auditioning. I do wish pricing was more user-friendly, as I would easily purchase the stereo amp if more affordable.

Someone finally achieved what was impossible... he made a low temperature class A amplifier. How? by making it class A/B of course. lol