TA-100

[leonski]

'not believing in it' doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Just not for YOU. A few sub makers, REL, I think, or is it JL? prefers such a connection.
Not that it matters, but I don't use speaker level, either.

Be that as it may, you have a point. But the trend is for Bass managment in even lower priced gear. And I don't mean the nearly-worthless (to me) 80hz of the THX or DOLBY standard.

My PARASOUND P5 has reasonable and flexible bass management. Full range and high AND low pass outputs. I run high pass to the mains and full range to the sub. I use the subs crossover. EASY.

If you need a RECEIVER? (preamp / amp / FM Tuner) I'd heartily recommend the OUTLAW RR2150.
Go thru the Stereophile Meaurements section for the bass management settings and measurements. That might provide enough flexibilty for you and the 100+ a side is no slouch.

www.stereophile.com/content/outlaw-audio-rr2150-stereo-receiver-measurements#UzthbMhc8L180Jz0.97

[New from Singapore]

Hi guys,

I'm looking at purchasing the TA-100 to pair with the ELAC B6.
I read that the TA-100 works well with either 4 Ohm or 8 Ohm speakers, the B6s are rated 6 Ohms.
Would this be an issue in driving the speakers?

Below specs of the B6 fyi:
Speaker type: 2-way, bass reflex
Tweeter: 1 x 1-inch cloth dome
Woofer: 1 x 6.5-inch woven aramid-fiber cone
Crossover frequency: 3,000 Hz
Frequency response: 44 to 20,000 Hz
Sensitivity: 87 dB at 2.83 v/1m
Recommended amplifier power: 30 to 120 wpc
Nominal/peak power handling: 50 / 120 wpc
Nominal impedance: 6 Ω; minimum 6 Ω
Binding posts: 5-way metal

Appreciate your kind attention to this!

[rvsixer]

Feb 16, 2017 23:18:47 GMT -5 New from Singapore said:

I read that the TA-100 works well with either 4 Ohm or 8 Ohm speakers, the B6s are rated 6 Ohms.
Would this be an issue in driving the speakers?

 No problem.

[dregoric]

Feb 16, 2017 23:18:47 GMT -5 New from Singapore said:

I read that the TA-100 works well with either 4 Ohm or 8 Ohm speakers, the B6s are rated 6 Ohms.
Would this be an issue in driving the speakers?

No issues at all! 6ohm is an average nominal impedance, it can go up to 20 ohm and down to 2ohm depends on the frequency. This is common for every speakers. 

[Josh7047]

Hi I'm looking to buy the ta-100 and was wondering if anyone has used this amp for running Netflix on USB or optical input. My current desktop DAC/headphone amp only plays a solid obnoxious tone. If anyone could help me with this would be great.

[novisnick]

Mar 4, 2017 13:41:47 GMT -5 Josh7047 said:

Hi I'm looking to buy the ta-100 and was wondering if anyone has used this amp for running Netflix on USB or optical input. My current desktop DAC/headphone amp only plays a solid obnoxious tone. If anyone could help me with this would be great.

Hi, Ive owned the TA-100 for some time now. Love it. I have a Blue ray player connected to my TV via HDMI and then the TV via optical to my TA-100. Movies and streaming works perfectly and sounds wonderful. I can run Netflix through my Blue Ray.

Hope this helps. 

[Josh7047]

Thanks Novisnick. Yes this does help your setup is one of the ways that didn't work on mine so it tells the ta-100 will work for what I need. I'm replacing a crappy 5.1 for the ta-100 and a set of elac ub5s. Wanting a simpler setup with better sound quality.

[drysdale]

Some of the posts have mentioned Outlaw Audio's RR2125 100 watts 8 Ohm receiver and compared it to the TA-100. This receiver has both main in and pre outs. So, it is upgradable.

As compared to the TA-100, it only has a 24/96 USB DAC, no optical and coax inputs. I do not know how robust an amp it has and if its 100 watts RMS is much more powerful than the TA-100s 50 watts RMS. I have not heard either of these products and do not know which USB DAC I would prefer.

I'm currently using an external USB DAC by HiFiMe (Sabre 9018 chip) in my living room 2.1 set-up. I am pleased with it, but have done no side by sides except comparing it with my pathetic Dell computer DAC.

I'm curious to hear either the TA-100 or the PT-100 plus the BasX A-300. The PT-100 plus the A-300 costs the same as the Outlaw receiver and has a more powerful amp and more DAC options.

I may pull the trigger on the TA-100 next month.

[brubacca]

The Outlaw Receiver is also over a decade old product. If you are buying for the analog section and the amp It wouldn't bother me. If you are more concerned about the digital, we'll it's a decade old product.

[drysdale]

I found a review of the Outlaw Audio RR2150 from March 11, 2006 (Stereophile). (I got the Outlaw Audio model number wrong above). An 11+ year old 24 bit/96 khz USB DAC is not necessarily a bad thing, but one would think better alternatives have been developed in the last dozen years. There is a boatload of external DACs available now. And at all price points from under $100 to over $5,000. It is a good sign for the stereo crowd that Outlaw has been able to keep the same model in production for so long and find buyers. A purely analog receiver or integrated amp is very versatile and easy to connect to external DACs, Blue-tooth receivers, etc. If the TA-100 does have a half way decent DAC in it, it should still sound good a dozen years from now.

[drysdale]

This thread has many comments on amp power specks. Here is my $2 worth (.02 cents adjusted for inflation):

The Sherwood RX4208 is a very low end receiver and sold thru Amazon. Power is listed as 100 watts rms. But that is at 1% distortion with two channels driven.

From the Amzaon website: "Power AmpType: Analog Discrete 2chPower Output: 2 Channel: 100W + 100W (40-20kHz/8Ω/1%)1 Channel: 100W/chTHD atR/O-3dB: 0.02%"

Actual power is far less than this number, probably somewhere north of 50 watts and south of 80 watts rms.

Stuff like this is why I am very skeptical of manufacturers.

I own this receiver and its power is somewhat comparable to my 75 watt RMS Yamaha R-S500 receiver. When I got the Sherwood home, I was expecting to hear some distortion, maybe the amp would have an audible hum when it was turned on and nothing was playing (that is what my Cyber-Acoustics 2.1 computer speakers do). But there was no hum! Ho hum, no hum. I did not know about "clipping" when I bought it and the 1% distortion is possibly the clipping number. At actual listening levels, it has clean, clear and audibly distortion free power.

(The biggest problem with Sherwood receivers appears to be quality control. There are many reviews about either DOA units or units that have an early death. My unit has worked flawlessly for going on 2 years (it was not DOA nor was it a crib death baby). It is in my bedroom now providing 2.0 stereo TV and also hooked up to my Dell laptop. I hope to move my Yamaha in there and retire the Sherwood.)

I checked on the TA-100 at the website and reviews here on this forum are very encouraging. I like the 105 caps it has and the power transformer looks awesome. So, I suspect (before actually listening) that the TA-100 should be a fairly stout (like dark beer!) amp somewhat comparable in power at least to a 75 watt amp. I'm just about done sitting on the fence and hope to order one next week.

[garbulky]

Mar 27, 2017 12:12:21 GMT -5 drysdale said:

This thread has many comments on amp power specks. Here is my $2 worth (.02 cents adjusted for inflation):

The Sherwood RX4208 is a very low end receiver and sold thru Amazon. Power is listed as 100 watts rms. But that is at 1% distortion with two channels driven.

From the Amzaon website: "Power AmpType: Analog Discrete 2chPower Output: 2 Channel: 100W + 100W (40-20kHz/8Ω/1%)1 Channel: 100W/chTHD atR/O-3dB: 0.02%"

Actual power is far less than this number, probably somewhere north of 50 watts and south of 80 watts rms.

Stuff like this is why I am very skeptical of manufacturers.

I own this receiver and its power is somewhat comparable to my 75 watt RMS Yamaha R-S500 receiver. When I got the Sherwood home, I was expecting to hear some distortion, maybe the amp would have an audible hum when it was turned on and nothing was playing (that is what my Cyber-Acoustics 2.1 computer speakers do). But there was no hum! Ho hum, no hum. I did not know about "clipping" when I bought it and the 1% distortion is possibly the clipping number. At actual listening levels, it has clean, clear and audibly distortion free power.

(The biggest problem with Sherwood receivers appears to be quality control. There are many reviews about either DOA units or units that have an early death. My unit has worked flawlessly for going on 2 years (it was not DOA nor was it a crib death baby). It is in my bedroom now providing 2.0 stereo TV and also hooked up to my Dell laptop. I hope to move my Yamaha in there and retire the Sherwood.)

I checked on the TA-100 at the website and reviews here on this forum are very encouraging. I like the 105 caps it has and the power transformer looks awesome. So, I suspect (before actually listening) that the TA-100 should be a fairly stout (like dark beer!) amp somewhat comparable in power at least to a 75 watt amp. I'm just about done sitting on the fence and hope to order one next week.

I listened to a Sherwood 2 channel receiver. Tons of detail and soundstage and a natural sounding tone. IMO the designers wrought out every dollar they had in resources just about perfectly. An exercise in value and making things count imo.

[drysdale]

I had the Sherwood out in my living room. It did OK for pop/rock stuff but poorly with classical. Classical has "piano forte" dynamics (soft and then loud and then soft again, etc.). To hear the detail in especially adagio and largo passages, I had to turn up the receiver and then the loud, dynamic forte passages kicked in. With Bruckner symphonies, I went from barely being able to hear the music to getting my ear drums peppered. (Bruckner's symphonies are somewhat neurotic!). I replaced my speakers with Polk Audio RTI A3s, my receiver with Yamaha R-S500, and added a HiFiMe Sabre 9018 USB DAC. Since then I added RTI A5 small towers. Now I can hear the detail just fine, even with Bruckner.

The Sherwood is somewhat bright, while the Yamaha is warmer and has a fuller mid-range and bass to it. They Yamaha is great for late night listening at lower volumes. The Sherwood is fine in a second office/bedroom system. I first added the Polk Audio RTI A3s to the Sherwood and they greatly improved the sound. Then I bought the DAC and then the Yamaha. Speakers can and do have a very major impact.

[garbulky]

Mar 27, 2017 14:07:27 GMT -5 drysdale said:

I had the Sherwood out in my living room. It did OK for pop/rock stuff but poorly with classical. Classical has "piano forte" dynamics (soft and then loud and then soft again, etc.). To hear the detail in especially adagio and largo passages, I had to turn up the receiver and then the loud, dynamic forte passages kicked in. With Bruckner symphonies, I went from barely being able to hear the music to getting my ear drums peppered. (Bruckner's symphonies are somewhat neurotic!). I replaced my speakers with Polk Audio RTI A3s, my receiver with Yamaha R-S500, and added a HiFiMe Sabre 9018 USB DAC. Since then I added RTI A5 small towers. Now I can hear the detail just fine, even with Bruckner.

The Sherwood is somewhat bright, while the Yamaha is warmer and has a fuller mid-range and bass to it. They Yamaha is great for late night listening at lower volumes. The Sherwood is fine in a second office/bedroom system. I first added the Polk Audio RTI A3s to the Sherwood and they greatly improved the sound. Then I bought the DAC and then the Yamaha. Speakers can and do have a very major impact.

I'm not sure which Sherwood I listened to. The tone leaned towards a slightly "cool" tone. You definitely couldn't call it warm. And its weakness may have been that its mid range wasn't quite as robust as better amps I'd heard.

[drysdale]

Sherwood is an old name in audio. There has been a major shuffling of the cards in the audio word in the last 2 decades. Some brands dropped out, some got bought out, etc. It is hard to know what is what and who is who. Sherwood's stuff is now almost purely budget, entry level gear.

I basically wanted to retire my 2.1 computer speakers in my bedroom. I did not want to spend for either another pair of $40-$50 2.1 speakers, nor did I want to drop $500 plus on high end computer speakers. There are many $50 -$100 small amps available built as computer desktop solutions. These often have limited inputs. So, I opted for a $110 stereo receiver. It sounds much better than my Cyber Acoustics 2.1 set-up, and I have my TV and Computer hooked into it. I have a quality pair of bookshelf speakers and TV audio and movie dialogue is very clear.

Most of the stuff I have I'm happy with, but then I think, "This could be better." What helps is that I also think, "This is not a life sentence." So, I get 2-4 years use and then think about upgrading. My mindset used to be "It ain't broke yet." Its nice to have functional gear and be able to upgrade at a leisurely pace.

[vneal]

OK I just received today the Emo TA100 and the Elac B5. This is going in a 10 X 12 loft. Review to follow