Jump to content

Article: Peachtree Audio nova300 Review


Recommended Posts

Thanks for the review. Do you think the Peachtree nova 300 (as a Class D integrated amp) may sound better than, e.g., a Wyred 4 Sound ST-500 mkII with a decent preamp? There're no balanced inputs on the Peachtree, do you think single ended inputs might sound better than balanced inputs (given there are no ground loops in the system)? And I noticed a ground connection on the back of the Peachtree. Did you try it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the review. Do you think the Peachtree nova 300 (as a Class D integrated amp) may sound better than, e.g., a Wyred 4 Sound ST-500 mkII with a decent preamp? There're no balanced inputs on the Peachtree, do you think single ended inputs might sound better than balanced inputs (given there are no ground loops in the system)? And I noticed a ground connection on the back of the Peachtree. Did you try it?

 

Hi Abtr - I wish I had answers to most of your questions. But, I don't. I can say that I didn't try the ground connection because I didn't try it with a turntable.

 

From the manual:

GROUND: Accepts the ground connection from a connected a phonograph/turntable.

Founder of Audiophile Style

Announcing Polestar | Quick Community Reviews and Ratings

Link to post
Share on other sites
You did not say much about the integrated DAC. How do you think the DAC in the Peachtree Nova 300 compares to an Ayre QB9? I have the QB9 and enjoy it, but need to upgrade my amp. Are the DAC's specs the same between the 150 and the 300?

 

Hi bottlerocket - Literally, the only difference between the 150 and 300 is the added 150 watts and better headphone section. I didn't use the DAC section only, so I really can't comment on the DAC in the nova300 versus the QB-9.

 

You could output the analog of your QB-9 into the nova300 and be good to go.

Founder of Audiophile Style

Announcing Polestar | Quick Community Reviews and Ratings

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi bottlerocket - Literally, the only difference between the 150 and 300 is the added 150 watts and better headphone section. I didn't use the DAC section only, so I really can't comment on the DAC in the nova300 versus the QB-9.

 

You could output the analog of your QB-9 into the nova300 and be good to go.

 

Hi Chris, I really enjoyed your review of the 150 & 300. Did you have a chance to use/compare the Auralic Aries Mini or the Sonore microRendu both with their respective upgraded power supplies with/to the internal dac on the Novas?

 

I'm a retiree and don't do NAS. All my music on an external drive attached to an older iMac. I have run cat6 to my system. In your opinion what combination would sound best and easiest to use?

 

Still debating on which way to go as far as the integrates. My speakers are Oskar Syrinx & Kithara both rated at 90db efficiency. The 300 should provide higher dynamics and better bass control even if one does not need the power? I don't use a headphone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
Hi bottlerocket - Literally, the only difference between the 150 and 300 is the added 150 watts and better headphone section. I didn't use the DAC section only, so I really can't comment on the DAC in the nova300 versus the QB-9.

 

You could output the analog of your QB-9 into the nova300 and be good to go.

 

The QB9 big advantage would have been s/n ratio, last series, however with the new nova 2.0 platform, we're hitting 111dB A-weighted at pre-amp level. I have been wanting to do this comparison too. Should be interesting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...