I’ve owner this amp for the past 10 months. In my nearly 50 years of stereo listening, buying, trading and selling, I’m never letting go of this beautiful marvel.
@@roderickdeleeuw2101 I don’t think so. The Technics replaced my high end Macintosh full tube amp and preamp. After a little bit of break in the Technics SU-G700M2, at least to my ears, with my Teckton Design Double Impact speakers is superior in bass slam, lifelike imaging and music scaling and detail. No regrets replacing the Mac gear that easily cost twice as much and uses 1/4 mains power, producing almost zero heat in the process and a really good phono preamp and superb digital conversion. Sure, the Technics does not have nearly the cachet, but I’m never looking back.
Thank you for the review. I've had a chance to hear the Technics on a few occasions and I found it to be detailed with excellent aesthetics, albeit a touch sterile sounding. Of course, there are no perfect amplifiers, so if you prefer a clean, pleasant sound that navigates through complex material without degrading the music, this might be your amp. If, on the other hand, you want a very natural, in the room with you palpable presentation, especially for single instruments or vocals, this may not be your top choice.
I got this when it first came out and love the sound. Not the least bit "dry" to my ears. It came close with my JBL 4319 speakers but that was due to its Al/Mag tweeter and midrange driver. Got same results with Class A/B. With my Revival Audio Atalante 3 monitors, it's a match made in heaven...literally. Thank you for this wonderful take on what I feel to be a seriously underappreciated integrated as they're too many know it alls out there with preconceived notions.
I have the Technics SU-G700M2 and have tuned it to my tastes with great joy and listening pleasure. I will warn, at least my setup will expose bad presses, but when it's on...man...wow...it's really really good. Full Stop. As for tone, it's fine leaving it completely neutral. But...I like to adjust. That said my usual setup wasn't working here, so I setup for more mid-range than normal amps I have used in the past after breaking it in. I have it hooked up to Polk R700's and it's simply amazing...and super quiet I might add. I am using a vintage Technics SL-QL1 Turntable with a high end vintage P-Mount Audio Technica OEM cart with the frequency response of 5-35 Hz. This system really punches above its weight class. Don't doubt this.
Such a beautiful piece of equipment. You can feel the passion and focus with which it was made by how you've highlighted it. I appreciate the time you took to detail your experience and thoughts on this Technics contribution to the art of music we are trying our best to enjoy. Something I am seriously considering to experience for myself now. At a surface level this SUG700M2 just looks gorgeous. I hope it's sound is commensurate with both pleasant and apparently unpleasant surprises (ie the pre-ringing) but it sounds like it almost just does too damned good of a job on what it intends to do and as you stated moving forward this is probably more of a "good" than bad thing as more recordings will be higher res. Again, thank you!
My 100 watt Panasonic SA XR-50 from 2003 has an Energy Star sticker on it. It has a single vent panel in its roof and runs cool. It is the present amp's ancestor. What draws me is the realistic number of digital inputs and the GaN Fet upgrade.
I heard this one and also its bigger brother (the 1000) at my favs Hifi dealer, powering different kinds of speakers. IMHO Tom is right -- these Technics amps have a very special sound quality to them. Transparency and bass definition is really on a very high level. But as Tom hints - it is probably not everyone's cup of tea. For my taste, there is a kind of "dryness" to the sound that I personally find very un-appealing. One feature that had been omitted in this video here is the LAPC - some sort of speaker impedance correction (NOT room correction). On some speakers, it can improve sound a little.
Yes, I didn’t have time to go into LAPC (other than showing the circuits). LAPC uses a test signal (a kind of impulse) to measure speaker/cable impedance and fine tune the output. The difference is noticeable, but didn’t seem tremendously significant. With different speakers it might matter more.
It was tested with 2 x 155 watts @4 ohms, with being able to provide sudden peak bursts of 2 x 200 watts @4 ohms which is sufficient for my Focal Sopra 1's supported with a Focal Sopra SW1000 sub in a medium-sized room ☺
Love technics , very good , interesting rewiew / rewiews , great attitude to gear and music , will buy this amp and the technics Cd player - streamer ,bravo ABSO!UTE SOUNDS
I suppose Zappa's Black Page or other would have intense detail in the recording - busy, too, and if your system made a Zappa soundstage, you'd have something - naturally I would want to hear any system with Rudy van Gelder recordings - Todd Rundgren sonics & recording tricks (like Froom & Blake for Lobos) would be stunning to hear over the LRS or Claryssus.. Pleasing anyway to me to have this host mention IMO the grandest symphonic arranger, ever - then the Chicano kings of swamp rock and slap echo, in a breath. @Chris Carson (Old And In The Way)
simplifying the stages sound like a good thing if done right. maybe i have done they myself, digital source into one digital box that does volume control and dsp, digital out from that into dac and into power amp. sounds like a short chain to me.
When I turning on and off my SU-G700M2 "clicks" in the right loudspeaker (since new), not loud but distinct and only in the right channel. Does yours SU-G700M2 also "clicks" like mine or is it just my that is damaged and needs repair?
What would be the best way to attack the amp digitally only to benefit from the best signal processing to the speakers, bypassing the amp's internal DAC? (streamer without DAC? CD Drive with upscaling ) , thanx
I haven’t studied the Linn architecture. A streamer would typically be digital in (Ethernet digital data from web) and digital out (USB digital data to DAC). But with Linn’s full system orientation, there are other places to draw the lines between circuit blocks.
Everything was going so well, and it in my mind I was thinking "wow, finally...a perfect, modern, forward thinking amp that will no doubt be the blueprint of all amps"...until I checked the specs. So technics went to all this trouble of creating a simplified unit completely geared towards the listener of digital music, and they didn't include a streamer?!? Are they actually crazy? They did everything so well, even making the thing look gorgeous, and no one in the design department paused to ask the question "Hmm, do you suppose any of our customers stream music"? I feel like smashing my head against a wall. Well all know just how straightforward and cheap it is to make a high quality streamer (thanks to Pi). It's frankly absurd that they chose not to include one in this amp, no doubt out of fear from audiophile snobs sniggering "eww, streamer amp eww eww eew". And yes, I know they do a similar streamer amp already, but it has that stupid plastic strip at the bottom with the LED. I actually thought Technics (with this amp) might have realised that not everyone who is streaming music is a teenager, who simply cannot live without screens and flashing dials, but alas no. I have to plug in a streamer if I want to listen to music. Groan.
It wasn't included because streaming platforms are personal preference, not because 'audiophiles' don't stream, clearly they do which is why this amp has multiple digital inputs. Including one would go against what a integrated amp is supposed to do; give you the best core functionality it can at its price.
One question: at around 14:45 you mention that digital recordings from the 1980s and 90s often exhibit some sort of pre-ringing due to immature digital processing at that time. Would you mind call out some releases (at the danger one couldn't unhear it)?
Try Los Lobos “Will The Wolf Survive” and see what you think is going on with the vocals. It might just be harmonic distortion or some straightforward recording error or an effects device, but it is clear on the Technics amp and doesn’t sound “real” (to me). I count that in favor of the amp, but others might want to paint over the issue. Usually pre-ringing is not so obvious, so I suspect this is not a good example. In the past when I’ve used apodizing filters to “remove” pre-ringing the impact is more a feeling of naturalness, where as before apodizing the music sounds a little “tense”. The easiest way for many people to hear this is to compare ‘80s vinyl and CDs of the same recordings.
@@thomasmartin2219 Thanks, listening to this album via Qobuz now. I agree that on two different chains the sound is rather harsh und rough and not very pleasant to listen to. Tried it on a Delta-Sigma DAC with Audeze headphones and my stereo (Denafrips R2R DAC, Yamaha integrated).
I own this amp and am trying to find a speaker to go with it. I have it hooked up to Sierra1's right now and they are ok ... but I was thinking about the Ls50 Metas ... does anyone else run this amp with the ls50's? I have heard they like at least 100w power and aren't great with class D amps ... PS, this amp is freakin amazing with a good vinyl pressing. The phono stage is excellent on it. (running a blue ortofon stylus)
@@MrOnasip Thanks ... I ended up running Sonus Faber Sonetto2's with a REL t7X ... really good balance and clarity with this pairing. The warmth in the Sonetto's tames the Digital sound and the upper levels really compliments the clarity of the amp.
Class D is digital no matter how you cut it. Pulse Width is not a representation of the original analog wave form. There is no substitution for Class A and Class B transistor or valve-tube amplification. Listeners probably can't hear a difference between the Classes though, and harmonic distortion and noise from the source is many orders of magnitude greater than what comes during the final speaker amplification.
I agree however it’s nice having different types of amplifier topologies in a system collection. Just like having a wine collection… different pairings for different moods and foods. 😊
" Pulse Width is not a representation of the original analog wave form. " - AS IF any amplifier is a representation of acoustic music. And what do you mean by "wave form"? Music is air transient air pressure, in three spatial dimensions. Microphones are a compromise, and recorded music is just not the same thing as live music.
Why is the watt rating different between what the reviewer is stating and what is shown on the screen? Which is correct, and what is the correct wattage rating?
Technics advises that the US and Japan pronunciation is “tech-neeks” and UK and EU is “tech-nicks”. Listening to Japanese ads, it is more like “tech-oo-neeks”. In any event, I went with the U.S. version.
@@thomasmartin2219 A case of you say Tomato, I say Tomato! I'd never heard anyone pronounce Technics that way until hearing all you North Americans on RUclips in recent years. I think in the west we mispronounce pretty much all Japanese company names...
why dont you show the inside ? Most who go digital, they avoid the cost of costly transformers, and they blow up the price, like here. I am certain you get moneys from video like this one. RUclips being your bread-and-butter, your opinions have no real value. Endo the line.
I believe the assumption is that you will use the onboard DAC via S/PDIF or USB. I used CD via S/PDIF and I used the USB output of a PC for Tidal and Qobuz into the amp. It does not seem to be Roon Ready.
I would prefer to say a high resolution amp reveals poor recordings “better” (more clearly) than a low or medium resolution amp. The point I was trying to convey (and apologies if this wasn’t clear) is that because of its revealing character, this Technics amp isn’t one that makes everything sound beautiful. Just the beautiful recordings of beautiful music. Hope that helps.
I’ve owner this amp for the past 10 months. In my nearly 50 years of stereo listening, buying, trading and selling, I’m never letting go of this beautiful marvel.
If a person likes tube amps, would this automatically disqualify the technics in your opinion?
@@roderickdeleeuw2101 I don’t think so. The Technics replaced my high end Macintosh full tube amp and preamp. After a little bit of break in the Technics SU-G700M2, at least to my ears, with my Teckton Design Double Impact speakers is superior in bass slam, lifelike imaging and music scaling and detail. No regrets replacing the Mac gear that easily cost twice as much and uses 1/4 mains power, producing almost zero heat in the process and a really good phono preamp and superb digital conversion. Sure, the Technics does not have nearly the cachet, but I’m never looking back.
I bought one and I can tell u that it sounds bigger and more spacious then it’s build in 70 watts. Iconic!
What speakers are you running?
A remarkably vivid description of what this product is doing and why it is of interest to audiophiles. Well done.
I appreciate seeing a review of something different from all the other reviewers.
I have the bigger brother su-r1000 and I love that amp.
Nice to see that the little brother have lot of what make bigger brother so great.
Thank you for the review. I've had a chance to hear the Technics on a few occasions and I found it to be detailed with excellent aesthetics, albeit a touch sterile sounding. Of course, there are no perfect amplifiers, so if you prefer a clean, pleasant sound that navigates through complex material without degrading the music, this might be your amp. If, on the other hand, you want a very natural, in the room with you palpable presentation, especially for single instruments or vocals, this may not be your top choice.
I got this when it first came out and love the sound. Not the least bit "dry" to my ears. It came close with my JBL 4319 speakers but that was due to its Al/Mag tweeter and midrange driver. Got same results with Class A/B. With my Revival Audio Atalante 3 monitors, it's a match made in heaven...literally. Thank you for this wonderful take on what I feel to be a seriously underappreciated integrated as they're too many know it alls out there with preconceived notions.
I have the Technics SU-G700M2 and have tuned it to my tastes with great joy and listening pleasure. I will warn, at least my setup will expose bad presses, but when it's on...man...wow...it's really really good. Full Stop.
As for tone, it's fine leaving it completely neutral. But...I like to adjust. That said my usual setup wasn't working here, so I setup for more mid-range than normal amps I have used in the past after breaking it in. I have it hooked up to Polk R700's and it's simply amazing...and super quiet I might add. I am using a vintage Technics SL-QL1 Turntable with a high end vintage P-Mount Audio Technica OEM cart with the frequency response of 5-35 Hz. This system really punches above its weight class. Don't doubt this.
Interesting product, glad to see innovation , not something I need, but good to see forward movement .
Such a beautiful piece of equipment. You can feel the passion and focus with which it was made by how you've highlighted it. I appreciate the time you took to detail your experience and thoughts on this Technics contribution to the art of music we are trying our best to enjoy. Something I am seriously considering to experience for myself now. At a surface level this SUG700M2 just looks gorgeous. I hope it's sound is commensurate with both pleasant and apparently unpleasant surprises (ie the pre-ringing) but it sounds like it almost just does too damned good of a job on what it intends to do and as you stated moving forward this is probably more of a "good" than bad thing as more recordings will be higher res. Again, thank you!
I have mine paired with a set of Tekton Design Lore's and love it! But I also knew this was a type of sound I enjoyed.
My 100 watt Panasonic SA XR-50 from 2003 has an Energy Star sticker on it. It has a single vent panel in its roof and runs cool. It is the present amp's ancestor. What draws me is the realistic number of digital inputs and the GaN Fet upgrade.
I heard this one and also its bigger brother (the 1000) at my favs Hifi dealer, powering different kinds of speakers.
IMHO Tom is right -- these Technics amps have a very special sound quality to them. Transparency and bass definition is really on a very high level. But as Tom hints - it is probably not everyone's cup of tea. For my taste, there is a kind of "dryness" to the sound that I personally find very un-appealing.
One feature that had been omitted in this video here is the LAPC - some sort of speaker impedance correction (NOT room correction). On some speakers, it can improve sound a little.
Yes, I didn’t have time to go into LAPC (other than showing the circuits). LAPC uses a test signal (a kind of impulse) to measure speaker/cable impedance and fine tune the output. The difference is noticeable, but didn’t seem tremendously significant. With different speakers it might matter more.
@@thomasmartin2219 LAPC does not make a night/day difference, and I was never sure if I liked the sound better with or without.
It was tested with 2 x 155 watts @4 ohms, with being able to provide sudden peak bursts of 2 x 200 watts @4 ohms which is sufficient for my Focal Sopra 1's supported with a Focal Sopra SW1000 sub in a medium-sized room ☺
18:27 - so great and precisionly explained !
appreciate a lot !!! Sir!
Love technics , very good , interesting rewiew / rewiews , great attitude to gear and music , will buy this amp and the technics Cd player - streamer ,bravo ABSO!UTE SOUNDS
The best equalizer I owned in the 1980's was a Technics, it made my amplifier and turntable sounding more expensive
Thanks Tom.
MAHLER, AND LOS LOBOS! Truly fine choices to test system tonality - likewise John McLaughlin, trio or Mahavishnu
I suppose Zappa's Black Page or other would have intense detail in the recording - busy, too, and if your system made a Zappa soundstage, you'd have something - naturally I would want to hear any system with Rudy van Gelder recordings - Todd Rundgren sonics & recording tricks (like Froom & Blake for Lobos) would be stunning to hear over the LRS or Claryssus.. Pleasing anyway to me to have this host mention IMO the grandest symphonic arranger, ever - then the Chicano kings of swamp rock and slap echo, in a breath. @Chris Carson (Old And In The Way)
I pair my technics with the Accoustic Sounds Q 50’s. Happy with the sound.
Great review. Enjoyed the heck out of that. Then again I’m super hi
I have technics pre power se-a900s&su-c800u,and want to change it,is G700 M2 worth it?
Woohoo for VU’s. Really adds no audio functionality or quality but it does satisfy the inner self.
simplifying the stages sound like a good thing if done right.
maybe i have done they myself, digital source into one digital box that does volume control and dsp, digital out from that into dac and into power amp. sounds like a short chain to me.
When I turning on and off my SU-G700M2 "clicks" in the right loudspeaker (since new), not loud but distinct and only in the right channel. Does yours SU-G700M2 also "clicks" like mine or is it just my that is damaged and needs repair?
What would be the best way to attack the amp digitally only to benefit from the best signal processing to the speakers, bypassing the amp's internal DAC? (streamer without DAC? CD Drive with upscaling ) , thanx
Good review. Thanks
Nice review. This is the same treatment that LInn does to its streamers, Analogue in/ Analogue out and 0 and 1 inside the box. Is that correct?
I haven’t studied the Linn architecture. A streamer would typically be digital in (Ethernet digital data from web) and digital out (USB digital data to DAC). But with Linn’s full system orientation, there are other places to draw the lines between circuit blocks.
Isn't all inputs upscaled PCM ? Post code modulation
I love mine with my Totem skye towers!
Everything was going so well, and it in my mind I was thinking "wow, finally...a perfect, modern, forward thinking amp that will no doubt be the blueprint of all amps"...until I checked the specs. So technics went to all this trouble of creating a simplified unit completely geared towards the listener of digital music, and they didn't include a streamer?!? Are they actually crazy? They did everything so well, even making the thing look gorgeous, and no one in the design department paused to ask the question "Hmm, do you suppose any of our customers stream music"? I feel like smashing my head against a wall. Well all know just how straightforward and cheap it is to make a high quality streamer (thanks to Pi). It's frankly absurd that they chose not to include one in this amp, no doubt out of fear from audiophile snobs sniggering "eww, streamer amp eww eww eew". And yes, I know they do a similar streamer amp already, but it has that stupid plastic strip at the bottom with the LED. I actually thought Technics (with this amp) might have realised that not everyone who is streaming music is a teenager, who simply cannot live without screens and flashing dials, but alas no. I have to plug in a streamer if I want to listen to music. Groan.
It wasn't included because streaming platforms are personal preference, not because 'audiophiles' don't stream, clearly they do which is why this amp has multiple digital inputs. Including one would go against what a integrated amp is supposed to do; give you the best core functionality it can at its price.
Mki used gave the best value, and diy sb acoustics, just use a fancy cable from a tv.
One question: at around 14:45 you mention that digital recordings from the 1980s and 90s often exhibit some sort of pre-ringing due to immature digital processing at that time.
Would you mind call out some releases (at the danger one couldn't unhear it)?
Try Los Lobos “Will The Wolf Survive” and see what you think is going on with the vocals. It might just be harmonic distortion or some straightforward recording error or an effects device, but it is clear on the Technics amp and doesn’t sound “real” (to me). I count that in favor of the amp, but others might want to paint over the issue. Usually pre-ringing is not so obvious, so I suspect this is not a good example. In the past when I’ve used apodizing filters to “remove” pre-ringing the impact is more a feeling of naturalness, where as before apodizing the music sounds a little “tense”. The easiest way for many people to hear this is to compare ‘80s vinyl and CDs of the same recordings.
@@thomasmartin2219 Thanks, listening to this album via Qobuz now. I agree that on two different chains the sound is rather harsh und rough and not very pleasant to listen to. Tried it on a Delta-Sigma DAC with Audeze headphones and my stereo (Denafrips R2R DAC, Yamaha integrated).
@@medonk12rs What speakers are you running with your Denafrips & Yamaha?
@@danmarjenka6361 a pair of ATC SCM40
I own this amp and am trying to find a speaker to go with it. I have it hooked up to Sierra1's right now and they are ok ... but I was thinking about the Ls50 Metas ... does anyone else run this amp with the ls50's? I have heard they like at least 100w power and aren't great with class D amps ... PS, this amp is freakin amazing with a good vinyl pressing. The phono stage is excellent on it. (running a blue ortofon stylus)
hi, I have owned this amplifier for a few weeks now, coupled with Audiovector QR 5 speakers, it plays very well
@@MrOnasip Thanks ... I ended up running Sonus Faber Sonetto2's with a REL t7X ... really good balance and clarity with this pairing. The warmth in the Sonetto's tames the Digital sound and the upper levels really compliments the clarity of the amp.
Just to be clear, for analogue inputs including vinyl, the signal is converted into digital by the amp and then back to analogue. Correct??
Yes
эх technics уже не тот!!!
Class D is digital no matter how you cut it. Pulse Width is not a representation of the original analog wave form. There is no substitution for Class A and Class B transistor or valve-tube amplification. Listeners probably can't hear a difference between the Classes though, and harmonic distortion and noise from the source is many orders of magnitude greater than what comes during the final speaker amplification.
Not accurate
I agree however it’s nice having different types of amplifier topologies in a system collection. Just like having a wine collection… different pairings for different moods and foods. 😊
" Pulse Width is not a representation of the original analog wave form. " - AS IF any amplifier is a representation of acoustic music. And what do you mean by "wave form"? Music is air transient air pressure, in three spatial dimensions. Microphones are a compromise, and recorded music is just not the same thing as live music.
Class D doesn't mean it's digital. It's just how the solid-state are driven. Most class d are anything but digital
Why is the watt rating different between what the reviewer is stating and what is shown on the screen? Which is correct, and what is the correct wattage rating?
My error in reading the Technics documents. That’s what the overlay says “correction”.
So this amp is 70 watts per channel into 8 ohms and 140 wpc into 4 ohms
Thank you so much for your reply. Beautiful amp, and great presentation.
Records are (mostly) digital nowadays.
A little obscure with your terminology, "D to A converter" is currently much more often referred to as "DAC"...
As a Robot I am offended , my ears are digital . 😂
Wasn't impressed considering how much it cost, ended up trading it on a Yamaha amp that far superior for a grand less..
An interesting product and review. But "Techniques"?!
Technics advises that the US and Japan pronunciation is “tech-neeks” and UK and EU is “tech-nicks”. Listening to Japanese ads, it is more like “tech-oo-neeks”. In any event, I went with the U.S. version.
@@thomasmartin2219 A case of you say Tomato, I say Tomato! I'd never heard anyone pronounce Technics that way until hearing all you North Americans on RUclips in recent years. I think in the west we mispronounce pretty much all Japanese company names...
Nope as it must have an analogue output to drive any speaker
There seems to be a lot of problems with this amp..error codes and failures.
why dont you show the inside ? Most who go digital, they avoid the cost of costly transformers, and they blow up the price, like here. I am certain you get moneys from video like this one. RUclips being your bread-and-butter, your opinions have no real value. Endo the line.
Technics, not 'techniques' FFS!
No USB DAC input though
I believe the assumption is that you will use the onboard DAC via S/PDIF or USB. I used CD via S/PDIF and I used the USB output of a PC for Tidal and Qobuz into the amp. It does not seem to be Roon Ready.
Interesting, so a digital amp reveals poor digital recordings better than an analogue amp.
I would prefer to say a high resolution amp reveals poor recordings “better” (more clearly) than a low or medium resolution amp. The point I was trying to convey (and apologies if this wasn’t clear) is that because of its revealing character, this Technics amp isn’t one that makes everything sound beautiful. Just the beautiful recordings of beautiful music. Hope that helps.
The ugliest piece of audio equipment i ever saw! What were they thinking with this upside down design. Flip that thing over!
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder !!. I like it alot; plis there are like 500 different amps with the old layout!! 🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️
Uninspiring for the price
Wow, so many buzzwords thrown in rapid fire, it's funny to listen and try to remember some people actually believe all this nonsense
Pure Nonsense.