I notice that
@ian34g,
@The Dreamer and
@whmacs are all operating either this very same power amplifier or its immediate predecessor, and all are very happy with their machines.
You will see from my signature (although that will change soon as I put it on a year's leave and use either a Pioneer or a Denon receiver) that I have a Yamaha RX-A2010 receiver in the kitchen. I bought it in July 2012. so it is eight years old now.
I am keenly aware that its age means that it is now well behind more modern devices. I am also aware that at the time that I bought it, it was second from top of Yamaha's integrated receiver range, the top model being the Yamaha RX-A 3010. (However, last year, I played a bit of
the Blu-ray of Fury to a younger (he's 37) relative of mine, who, although not a fanatic, is pretty switched-on about audio-visual stuff. With reference to
@whmacs's post #18 above the volume control was at about -15dB, and I very seldom go above -12dB. My cousin's son described the sound in my kitchen from my 8.1 speaker system as being "
ridiculously clear", which did please me.) I am further aware that, in most manufacturer ranges, a separate processor / power amplifier combination will, by some margin, outrank the best integrated receiver that that manufacturer makes. Indeed Mr Phil Hinton, in his review of the
IOTA AVXP1 seven-channel power amplifier mentions, when comparing the IOTA to the integrated Yamaha RX-A 3050 receiver, that: "Coming from using the Yamaha RX-A3050 with the built-in amplification as my normal reference, it was clear to hear an instant improvement in power and headroom from the IOTA now taking over that role.". And,
@Steve Withers and
@mb3195 mentioned in the discussion thread of the Emotiva XPA-11 Gen 3 power amplifier that the Emotiva is better than the IOTA (which it should be, at twice the price). In their conclusions to their reviews, Messrs Withers and Hinton suggest that the Yamaha MX-A5200 and the Emotiva XPA-11 Gen 3 are approximately on a par. Now, I fully acknowledge that there will be other, international, manufacturers of power amplifIers which compete on a global market. For instance, if you google "ATI Power amplifiers" you will be taken to some seriously impressive machines. Lastly, those interested in power per channel numbers will find them on page 3 of this review
Yamaha RX-A2010 receiver of my now pretty humble machine in my kitchen system, which in my flat operates in a room that measures 17' x 14' x 7'6" (it's a false ceiling).
So what do I conclude?
1. ATI amplifiers (and others) may indeed be better be better than the Yamaha MX-A5200 that is the subject of this review.
2. The Yamaha MX-A5200 and its predecessor give great pleasure to at least three contributors to this thread, and they show no sign of wanting to change. with no owners dissenting,
3. The Yamaha MX-A5200 power amplifier and its predecessor, or even the IOTA power amplifier, is certainly significantly better than the power section of any Yamaha integrated receiver, such as my own Yamaha RX-A2010.
4. However, my very lowly, fairly ancient, Yamaha RX-A2010 continues to satisfy me (and all visitors, not only my cousin's son) so without a lottery win - hell, since I'm a good environmentalist, even
with a lottery win - despite any percieved deficiencies in the numbers of its specified power outputs, I'll probably keep it.