Specifications

" We also continue to pay attention
to all of the other “little” things that
we always do that other makers
seem to ignore. For example, more
and more manufacturers are using
“touchscreen” control panels on their
products now. These are nothing
more than ashy gimmicks designed
to appear sophisticated, yet in reality
degrade the sound signicantly while
raising the cost considerably - the
worst kind of trade o in my book. "
a performance compromise than having one box for
digital and one for analog. I think that combining the
volume function with a DAC can make a lot of sense for
an all-digital system, but not so much if one has any
analog sources.
Obviously at least one of the components must have
a volume function, but to my way of thinking the best
place to put it if you are combining boxes is with the
power amp. Then one is not limited to a digital-source-
only system when going for maximum performance.
Digital sources with volume control
But there is probably a big enough customer base for
digital-source-only systems that some day we may build
a DAC with a volume control. One big advantage of
doing this is that one can make a high quality volume
control for signicantly less cost. The reason is that a
purely digital volume control is practically free, but it
degrades the sound quality
more and more as the
volume is reduced. But with
only digital sources, one
could make a hybrid volume
control. A good approach
would be to have (say) six
small (eg, 1 dB steps) digitally.
Then the maximum
degradation would only be
one bit. In a 24-bit system
this would still leave 23 bits
of performance, which is
more than enough. (Any
real-world system is limited
to only 20 or *maybe* 21
bits of resolution.) Then the
analog volume control would
only need coarse steps of 6
dB. This means a 12-position
switch would be more than enough, and that is a *lot*
cheaper than (for example) the 60-position switch we use
in our KX-R analog preamp.
Another problem with putting too many functions into
one box is the lack of ability to upgrade. For example,
Linn makes some boxes that have everything in them
but the speakers. This is a nice solution for a less-than-
maximum performance system, such as a second system
for the bedroom or oce. But then there are severe price
constraints.
We will surely oer more integrated amps in the future
besides our current AX-7 and quite possibly a DAC with
a volume control for digital-source-only systems, but I
don’t foresee us ever building an integrated system.
A very long-winded answer, but I hope that helps you
understand where we are coming from. So there is a
(very long-winded) explanation of why our integrated
amp still retains the basic feature set of a traditional
integrated amp, and why we
don’t include digital inputs,
or phono stages, or whatever
strange combinations of
things that some customers
ask for.
I’m not saying that those
aren’t valid for some
situations or that they won’t
make some customers happy.
I’m just saying that they
don’t meet the requirements
that Ayre is aiming for and
that if they are looking for
something like that they
should look at other brands.
Back to the design of the
AX-5.
OK, so now we have created
an integrated amp that is
“ I guess the bottom line is that to me, what you are asking for is not really an
‘integrated amp’ so much as an “integrated system. ”
t: 01727 865488 e: [e-mail] w: www.symmetry-systems.co.uk
Symmetry, Suite 5, 17 Holywell Hill, St Albans, Hertfordshire AL1 1DT
Page 12
The AX-5 Story
from Ayre Acoustics March 2014