advertisement


Pioneer A400 VS Audiolab 8000A

R

rockadelic

pfm Member
Did anyone compare these 2 amps with the same source & speakers? Is there any difference between early 8000A models & later ones? I have seen one on ebay with a grey casing & nikel plated inputs, while others have black casings with copper or brass plated inputs! :)
 
I've owned an audiolab 8000a and its a very good amp, if a little lean / clinical sounding. Partner carefully with speakers, very good with epos ES11 / QUAD speakers etc. The later black case models with 'F' in the serial (MK 5) are the one to go for as they have Elna stargets and evox film caps inside. They sound better. Lovely build quality.

A friend had a Pioneer A400 with B&W speakers and it sounded superb, giant killer of an amp for the price to be honest. I've read of several mods that improve it further. Probably the better amp out of the two sound wise and more forgiving with speaker choices. Again superb build quality. I would definitely consider one of these myself now you mention it! Maybe in the new year...

Both amps are second hand bargains these days.
 
i have had a 400x for the last 15 years.
From what i read its not quite as nice as the 'x less' model it replaced.
But i have been entirely happy with it. It drives the tdl rtl 3 very nicely and has a decent phono.
 
Back in the early 1990s I had the following setup:

  • Thorens TD160C/TP16/AT410
  • Rotel RCD965BX CDP
  • Audiolab 8000A integrated
  • Tannoy 613 floorstanders
The Audiolab was stolen during an interrupted burglary and was not replaceable as the local distributors had shut their doors, so replaced it with a Pioneer A400 (not the 'x' version) and passed that whole system down to elder daughter (except the TD160C which she didn't need). She still has that same system some 12 years later and loves it.

The 8000A was a black late model (F-series) and was equipped with gold-plated RCA sockets on the rear panel. The A400 was licked up second hand from my pet dealer who had taken it as a trade-in on a Linn Intek. (A few days later the customer who had bought the Intek went back to the dealer wanting to buy back the A400... Go figure...)

The phono stage on the 8000A was actually quite a good one.

The 8000A tended to be somewhat clinical and detailed, whereas the A400 seemed a bit more musically involving, but without the etched musical picture presented by the 8000A. Both amps were quite capable of driving the Tannoys to high levels with no sign of stress.

The build quality of both amps was good, but with the 8000A edging out the A400 by a small margin

In summary, both are good amps from that period and share decent build quality - their relative sonic portrayals are good and the differences noted above are noticeable but not that significant.

Whichever you decide upon, you may well want to consider having the amplifier you buy put through a 'refurbishment' process to replace key components (e.g. capacitors) to realise the potential of the amp.

Happy hunting...
 
I remember both of these. To be honest both (for me) are just different, but equally bland, flavours. I well remember the arrival of the A400 (amid enormous fanfare from certain magazines) - unfortunately the reality was an enormous letdown; it was OK but nothing special in the greater scheme of things. I preferred the Audiolab but even then it wasn't my first (or second) choice - just too tonally grey.
 
Advice on 8000a's when I bought one second hand 2 years ago was that golden rca sockets are better. the rca sockets I had on one I've owned since mid 80's all worked loose/broke in time and needed replacing; definitely worth checking the sockets are all good...
 
I remember many years ago demming both, and them being comprehensively beaten by an A&R A60, which I bought and kept for some years.
 
We sold the 8000A by the hundred. It was always a popular choice, especially in the early days when there wasn't so much competition. The combination of smart styling, good build, sensible facilities, reliability and reasonable sound made it the default choice for those who didn't want 'tweaky' Hi-Fi. The later days saw it take over from Quad as a 'sensible' amp, when they were bought up by the Chinese.

The Pioneer A400 was popular for a short while spurred on almost entirely by publicity in one magazine. Although it was often asked for by the public, we only sold a handful as the sound was thin and hard and uninvolving. It didn't live up to it's reputation. IMO
 
The Pioneer A400 was popular for a short while spurred on almost entirely by publicity in one magazine. Although it was often asked for by the public, we only sold a handful as the sound was thin and hard and uninvolving. It didn't live up to it's reputation. IMO[/QUOTE]

You'd have to create a spectacular system mismatch to get that result! I had an A400 driving my Gales recently, and it was none of those things.
 
Well, using a variety of turntables, CD players and speakers of that vintage it always sounded that way, which is why we sold so few. IMO
 
I had a 400 running the other week

Exposure CDP/ A400/ Epos es 11's. Chord chorus i/cs and exposure speaker cable. Gear on a quadraspire rack.

It sounded not so good the first couple of hours. I left it on overnight. Next day it all sounded superb. Really good, although I only ran for a couple of hours.
I was thinking of selling and was just trying the stuff out. Keeping for now.
I will set up and try again. Just to confirm this.
I suspect the A400, in a non sympathetic system, and not properly warmed up could sound pretty pants. Perhaps a fussy little bugger then, rather than inherently crap ?
 
I have to say, I find my memory of the A400 much more closely aligned to the experience of hifi dave than to some of the other comments made on thread. As I recall, I found that at lower volume it was flat and un-dynamic; when the volume was turned up it started to sound strained and still not particularly dynamic (just a bit louder) - I also found it sold badly (when demonstrated).
 
I have used both and on the same speakers. The A400 got zapped by lightening. I managed to talk the insurance into replacing it with an 8000a. The moment the 8000a was installed it sounded more musical, smooth, and detailed. At first I thought the A400 was more dynamic, but soon realised it was just a little more forward and maybe brash, but the 8000a actually was simply dynamic - it hit rim shots like a rifle shot. I was so impressed with the Audiolab I added a 8000PX and bi-amped, then added a 8000T.

As previously mentioned in other posts, the black case is better, from serial "F" onwards the caps are better grade as are some other components.
My 8000a is an F, the PX was an E. They changed every year much like the car reg system does
After the E serial numbers Audiolab was bought out by McLaren and the fall from grace followed - shame what stupid and unattached marketing can do.

I still since changed to all Naim system, but still have the 8000a waiting to go into an office set up, or if the right home is makes a good offer I might sell it.
 
Bought an A400 the week Freddy Mercury died (just a thing I remember).

Loved it. Was also one of the first to have the Tom Evans GTE mod done to it. This pushed it even further.

Super amp for the money and sounded great to my ears. Probably more a rock amp than a classical/jazz one. I dont know how it sounds with modern loud CDs pushed through it. I handed mine over in 1998 before it got too bad.

It's still going strong in my brothers system nearly 20 years on.

Hunt out a GTE if you can. I could tell them apart visually at the time but the differences are now lost in my mind.
 
I know i'm applying the paddles to an old thread but just thought i'd air my thoughts...
The 8000A was one of those amps i really wanted to like but having owned the 8000A and the superior 8000S i was left with the impression the the 8000A had £500 build quality and a £200 sound, cold and analytical springs to mind.
My experience with the Pioneer A400 was completely the reverse, i always preferred British gear and the A400 was visually just like all the other foreign imports which is why i eventually replaced it with a Cyrus2.Though this wasn't a sonic improvement (same as ) it fulfilled my desire for a British amp.
I agree that reasonably careful matching was a must for the Pioneer whereas the Audiolab pumped that cold ,analytical sound out pretty much regardless of what it was matched to.
Best quality budget to mid priced ancilliaries were a pre requisite for the Pioneer to shine, matched to a smooth detailed source and open, wide bandwidth speakers helped bring out the best in them.
So in conclusion the Pioneer aimed for the moon and nearly got there whereas the Audiolab never quite managed to leave earths orbit. (i still like the look of them though!)
 
today I wouldnt buy either.

I had an 8000a on loan from a dealer when it was released, and it was easily bettered by a harmon kardon hk1400 - itself a £400 ish amp. A better second hand buy for the peanuts it would go for now.

But then, there have been better amps since, and better on the second hand market. . as I said, today I wouldnt buy either, even second hand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top