Emotiva XPA-5 vs Anthem MCA 50

[natethegreat]

Hello all,

I have a theater of RP3s, RC-7, RS-7s and a listening room of Golden Ear Triton two towers... I'm looking for the amp to run these. I am going to go with a 5 channel amp at first and then buy a 2 channel down the road. But for now the 5 channel will do both... of course not at the same time.

I want to spend around $1000 or less for a nice 5 channel amp. That means I would need to buy a used Anthem MCA 50 or a new XPA-5 or something else... Anyone had both of these amps and can comment on which they like better? I am open to other suggestions as well and am open to used amps.

Thanks

[Pauly]

I've never heard the MCA 50, but I have the XPA-5 and it's been a great amp.

Here's a good option from the used market...app.audiogon.com/listings/sunfire-cinema-grand-5-channel-amplifier

Also, the NAD T-955 is a very good option. It has less power, but it should be plenty for your system, and it's a great performer for the price.www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=NAT955

[Deleted]

The MCA 50 is a great amp and so is the Emo xpa-5. IMO the emo is the better deal of the 2. I've never owned a 50 but I know people that do. Just the fact the emo will be new with full warranty is a good enough reason to get one. It's also rated for slightly more power than the 50.

[Deleted]

I had some difficulty getting specs on the RP3 except to find it might include a powered sub built-in. The RC-7 and RS-7 are more current models. For HT with a built-in sub or down the road an external sub the XPA-5 should be a great match for driving the Klipsch with 5 channels driven specified at 200 watts into 8 Ohms (180 watts - MCA-50) for the very efficient Klipsch.

The Triton Two towers interest me especially since they have the same type of tweeter that is in my Airmotiv speaker. S&V review says they have extraordinary off axis dispersion which is exactly what I heard in my room. I would be interested if you have time to give some feedback on them. I'm not usually a fan of towers with built-in subs so I would be interested to get your review on how clean and defined the lower bass is.

That said, they tested the Tower Two's at 90dB's sensitivity and about 5 ohms impedance. Presuming you will then be driving them in two channel mode with their own powered sub, I feel the XPA-5 should be great. In two channel mode I would guess you will be have somewhere near 350 watts plus per channel into 5 ohms. If that is sufficient in your opinion you could down the road look for a UPA-2 for the read channels or if you want a little more power for the Tower Two's then the XPA-1 would be my choice.

If I had $2750 or more and I had to spend all of it on a new 5 channel amp then the Anthem MCA-50 would certainly be on my short list from its reputation. No I've not heard it and I'm in the school that says only a tightly controlled A/B test will reveal any sound difference at all. My money says you will hear no difference between these two amps. A brand new XPA-5 being 10 lbs heavier, with a 5 year warranty and 30 day return, slightly more power into 4 ohms (300 watts versus 265 watts), and the beautiful blue lights ( ;D) makes it a huge no-brainer for me.

[roadrunner]

The Anthem MCA 50 and the Emotiva XPA-50 are very similar to each other. They have nearly identical specs and performance. I doubt you would be able to pick one over the other in a blind test. The XPA-5 has slightly better build. The XPA delivers 200 W/channel into 8 Ohms, has 6 output devices/channel and weighs 66 pounds; the MCA 50 delivers 180 W/channel into 8 Ohms, has 5 output devices/channel and weighs 60 pounds. Both amps receive rave reviews from all who review them. You will love either one of them. I have no idea what you will be able to find a used Anthem selling for, but I am fairly certain the new XPA-5 will cost less.

[Deleted]

Roadrunner, we've got to get someone at Emo (hint, you talk to them a lot), to get the scale out and weigh an un-boxed XPA-5. I thought it was originally spec'd at about 72lbs.

Note the in the specs that all the X series amps weigh about 14-15 lbs less than the boxed shipping weight. However, the specs on the XPA-5 boxed versus un-boxed is listed as 86 lbs to 66 lbs, 20 lbs difference.

The XPA-1 shows 14 lbs diff, the XPA-2 shows 14 lbs diff and the XPA-3 shows 15 lbs diff. I have a funny feeling that either the boxed weight on the XPA-5 is really 80 lbs and the un-boxed weight is really 66 lbs, or it is 86/72 lbs.

I'm guessing the actual weight on the XPA-5 is about 72 lbs. Many folks don't care but I do and feel the weight of an amp is just another of many facts that I consider in evaluating it, if they are both A/B amps.

Anthem's current specs show the CA-50 at 61 lbs. I find some significance in that weight difference of 11 lbs (or at least 5 lbs).

I just e-mailed Matt Wall to check on the weight.

[weird23]

Feb 23, 2012 0:52:54 GMT -5 roadrunner said:

The Anthem MCA 50 and the Emotiva XPA-50 are very similar to each other. They have nearly identical specs and performance. I doubt you would be able to pick one over the other in a blind test. The XPA-5 has slightly better build. The XPA delivers 200 W/channel into 8 Ohms, has 6 output devices/channel and weighs 66 pounds; the MCA 50 delivers 180 W/channel into 8 Ohms, has 5 output devices/channel and weighs 60 pounds. Both amps receive rave reviews from all who review them. You will love either one of them. I have no idea what you will be able to find a used Anthem selling for, but I am fairly certain the new XPA-5 will cost less.

What makes you say the XPA-5 has a better build quality?

Having owned both amps I can tell you that's simply not the case, both are well made amps. The XPA-5 that I have the transformer hums and the Anthem was silent, the MCA 50 also had a lower noise floor in my system. The XPA-5 does run cooler than the MCA 50, the Emo may be a better choice if your putting it in an enclosed cabinet.

I also don't see how comparing weight has any bearing on how one will sound better or worse than the other, six pounds really isn't going to make a difference one way or the other.

I've seen quite a few MCA 50's selling for $1k on the used market.

[hikinokie]

My xpa-5 hums loudly

[natethegreat]

I have been reading in other forums that the XPA has a hum to it. Could this just be their setup somehow or is this normal?

Thanks everyone for the input. I'll post more on my speakers later chuckienut.

[LCSeminole]

Having looked at the GoldenEar site, the Triton 2's have 1200w digital amps for the built in subwoofers, so any power amplifier you get will be basically doing mid and tweeter duty. Having looked at what Triton 2 owners on their own home forum have recommended, most are calling them relatively efficient and some are only using a receiver. I would recommend giving their forum a look see as well as calling Golden Ear and seeing what their thoughts on power for these speakers are.

www.goldenear.com/community/18-Triton-Two-Tower/245-How-much-and-what-type-of-amp

As for the XPA-5 and hum, mine was one of the first to be shipped by Emotiva so I've had it from its debut. I've not ever had a hum, and to add the noise floor paired with my extremely efficient Klipsch Legend speakers is almost inaudible. If you are that concerned about a hum, maybe a call to Emotiva would clear this up for you.

[jamrock]

Since the etiology of a hum can be so varied, it should be logically isolated before any particular component is blamed. And, if the component is so identified, it would be expected that the manufacturer would be promptly notified. My GFA 585 hummed for approx 1 month until I realized that it was the expensive looking interconnect that the manufacturer supplied with it. The XPA-5 is $899.00 with a great warranty and great customer service. Chuckienut had it right!

[ottaone]

I had an MCA-50 for about three years. I bought cuz I was mad that the MPS-2 was discontinued when I was read to buy an amp.

I had to send it for repair once since the auto on feature was working inconsistently. I sold it later for about a $500 "loss" to buy Emo.

For the price of one MCA-50, you can buy three UPA-1s and one UPA-2. That would be my recommendation.

[Deleted]

Feb 23, 2012 5:48:05 GMT -5 weird23 said:

I also don't see how comparing weight has any bearing on how one will sound better or worse than the other, six pounds really isn't going to make a difference one way or the other.

I just got a response from Matt Wall at Emotiva. He is a great guy and one of the many reasons Emotiva is such a winner.

He said they weighed the XPA-5 un-boxed and it weighed 76 lbs and they would correct this on the website.

I can't say that the XPA-5 sounds any better than the MCA-50. I doubt that is does, with perhaps the rare exception that the fairly small amount of extra power would occasionally make a difference.

However, in this case a difference of apparently 15 lbs IMO is an indication of comparative build and parts quality whether it has any audible effect or not. I'll take the amp with the beef, especially when it costs about 1/3 the price.

[Golden Ear]

^^^ There are many reason why amps or av receiver were heavy, one of them was chassis, power transformer and heat sink. Heavy does not translate better sound. This remind me of my old receiver that I no longer own the Yamaha RXV-1 which has weight 62 pounds un-boxed. If you look inside of that unit it has very think chassis especially the front that appear to have around half a inch metal and side were also quarter of an inch metal. The power transformer is not as big as you think but typical size transformer that has 100 watt a channel. The UPA-2 that I have has alot bigger than RXV-1 that I used to own. Because it was a flagship, it was made in Japan instead a typical China made. Did I like the sound? In movie yes but for music it has more to desire because it has so complex circuitry and every analog input has to go to analog to digital converter which degrade sound quality, then to its DSP processing then another DAC. AS with any DSP I heard, Yamaha has the most realistic that I ever heard compare to typical jazz, stadium mode on another receiver.

[weird23]

Feb 23, 2012 17:14:30 GMT -5 jamrock said:

Since the etiology of a hum can be so varied, it should be logically isolated before any particular component is blamed. And, if the component is so identified, it would be expected that the manufacturer would be promptly notified. My GFA 585 hummed for approx 1 month until I realized that it was the expensive looking interconnect that the manufacturer supplied with it. The XPA-5 is $899.00 with a great warranty and great customer service. Chuckienut had it right!

What makes you think that hasn't been done?

I didn't ask or need your help/commentary on this subject, I'm more than capable of doing that on my own. Just stating my experience using the two amps. I will eventually get it looked at by Emo but don't feel like dealing with the hassle of crossing the border back into the US from Canada at the moment. To be honest it would cost almost the same amount of money with less aggravation to sell this one and just order a new one.

[roadrunner]

Feb 23, 2012 21:09:23 GMT -5 @chuckienut said:

Feb 23, 2012 5:48:05 GMT -5 weird23 said:

I also don't see how comparing weight has any bearing on how one will sound better or worse than the other, six pounds really isn't going to make a difference one way or the other.

I just got a response from Matt Wall at Emotiva. He is a great guy and one of the many reasons Emotiva is such a winner.

He said they weighed the XPA-5 un-boxed and it weighed 76 lbs and they would correct this on the website.

I can't say that the XPA-5 sounds any better than the MCA-50. I doubt that is does, with perhaps the rare exception that the fairly small amount of extra power would occasionally make a difference.

However, in this case a difference of apparently 15 lbs IMO is an indication of comparative build and parts quality whether it has any audible effect or not. I'll take the amp with the beef, especially when it costs about 1/3 the price.

What's another 10 pounds, here or there? LOL Emotiva's business model is the reason they can produce such high quality A/V components and sell them for one-third the cost of their competitors. One of the things that first caught my attention to Emotiva's products was it's outstanding build quality. When dealing with products of outstanding quality the weight of a component is generally indicative of its build quality.

[Deleted]

I'm certain some of the hum problems are because of the 32dB gain of the emo xpa amps vs a 28dB average of other makers.

[Deleted]

We seem to keep going back to whether heavy means better sound. I agree that it might not make any difference in better sound at normal reproduction levels. I'm in the camp that says all relatively equal SS amps sound the same until they reach the point of audible distortion near or at clipping. The amps of high quality that I'm talking about, which include the XPA-5 and the MCA-50 are virtually ruler flat from 20Hz to 20kHz. The little bit of extra weight in two other wise equal amps to me infers either a little more power or slightly better build quality in amps built in the same time frame. If I see two amps about the same output power and one weighs significantly more, I am guessing better build quality and not one being filled with Tennessee Shanghai mountain river rock.

As an example in receivers, I like to go back and use the progression from the Onkyo 805 AVR receiver to the 806 model the subsequent year. Secrets of Hi-Fi (another shameless plug for J. Milton's boss) reviewed both of these two models.



From the 806 review by Brian Florian, Oct 2008:
"I've been following and reporting to you on Onkyo's 800 series receivers for some time now. They occupy that juicy $1000ish slice of the market and have done quite well, as such.

Milestones include the original 800 in 2004, a most impressive THX Select receiver, and last year, when they raised the price by only $100, yet achieved THX Ultra2 status on the model 805.

Today's subject is no less than the newest entry in that line, the TX-SR806. In the broad strokes it ups the ante with better video processing, a revised I/O compliment which tilts things more towards the digital, and THX Ultra2 Plus status, which we will take the opportunity to introduce to you later in this review.

All without raising the SLP from $1099. Did they have to give up anything? Let's find out!

..........Small things don't go unnoticed. When FedEx dropped the unit off at my office, I immediately noticed that I could lift the thing without too much strain whereas last year I distinctly remember asking for help getting the previous model into the car. What's more amusing is that the very next day I was contacted by a reader asking if I would be reviewing the 806, and what did I make of the weight reduction. Consumers notice things like that.



6 ohm setting (default)

8 ohm load ..... 144 Watts
4 ohm load ..... 217 Watts

4 ohm setting

8 ohm load ..... 36 watts
4 ohm load ..... 56 watts

.....clearly something has been given up in terms of amplifier power"

SPECIFICATIONS ..... Onkyo TX-SR806
Codecs: Dolby Pro Logic IIx, Dolby Digital+, Dolby TrueHD, DTS (ES, Neo:6, 96/24), DTS-HD Master
Precision: 24-Bit/96kHz A/D, 24-Bit/192kHz D/A
2-Zone Operation
Satellite Radio Capable
Power Output: 130 watts RMS/Channel @ 0.03%THD, 2 Channels Driven into 8 Ohms
MFR: 10Hz - 100kHz (+1dB, -3dB)
THD: 0.08% (20Hz - 20kHz)
Dimensions: 7.6" H x 17.1" W x 18.1" D
Weight: 45.2 Pounds (actually 37.5 lbs, see below)
MSRP: $1,099 USA
Onkyo USA






From the 805 review by Brian Florian, Sep 2007:

6 ohm setting (default)

8 ohm load ..... 173 Watts
4 ohm load ..... 270 watts

4 ohm setting

8 ohm load ..... 87 watts
4 ohm load ..... 151 watts



Specifications:
SSP Section
● Codecs: Dolby Pro Logic IIx, Dolby Digital+,
Dolby TrueHD, DTS (ES, Neo:6, 96/24), DTS-HD
Master
● Precision: 24-Bit/96kHz A/D, 24-Bit/192kHz D/A
● Three-Zone Operation
● Satellite Radio-Capable

Amplifier Section
● Power Output: 130 Watts RMS/Channel x 7 into
8 Ohms, All Channels Operating (that's all 7 channels folks)
● MFR: 10 Hz - 100 kHz (+ 1 dB, - 3 dB)
● THD: 0.08% (20 Hz - 20 kHz)

General
● Dimensions: 7.6" H x 17.1" W x 18.1" D
● Weight: 50.9 Pounds
● MSRP: $1,099 USA

Onkyo USA


So we see the 806 at the same exact MSRP as the 805, apparently to try and stay competitive, but with a 5.7 lb (actually 13.4 lbs, see below) reduction in total weight. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to discover that they went South/wimpy on the amplifier, which very few folks noticed and probably few of them "heard any difference." The reason this example sticks in my mind was because at the time I was seriously interested in the 805. Since I always look at the weight of any component, I immediately noticed the weight reduction. However, Secrets apparently made a mistake since Onkyo both in their published specs and owner's manual shows a drop in weight from 50.9 lbs to 37.5 lbs, a decrease of 13.4 lbs! that to me is a very big drop and of interest whether I can hear the difference at reasonable levels or not.

So now you know why this nut always carefully looks at the weight of a speaker or component. Many times to me it is indicative of quality build.

As far a the RXV-1 Yamaha being made in Japan, I think the real reason is that all of the Yamaha receivers 12 years ago were made in Japan and not in China. Actually my latest Nikon prime lens is made in China and my new Nikon D7000 DSLR is made in Thailand and they are both superb products IMO.




(note: Emotiva prefers to use blue river rock to increase the weight of their amps)

[Deleted]

Feb 23, 2012 22:55:40 GMT -5 roadrunner said:

One of the things that first caught my attention to Emotiva's products was it's outstanding build quality. When dealing with products of outstanding quality the weight of a component is generally indicative of its build quality.

When I first received my XPA-5 and was complaining to my friend about my sore back, he said, I've got to come over and inspect that 75 lb 200/300 5 channel power amp you bought for $799.

He worked in the family high end shop for years and then on the West Coast for Pacific Stereo for years. We popped the hood and he said, OMG!, that is one well built amp! He no longer is in the business but stays reasonably up to date, builds his own speakers and knows the inside of power amps. He said it looked very similar in build quality to the Parasound/Halo units. I thought that was a pretty nice compliment for the XPA-5.

PS: He was just as impressed with the Emo ERM-1 speaker. Before I even said anything about design engineers at Emo and after I had gone over all the features and specifications he took a good look and listen, he said that's got Vance Dickason written all over it.

End of inspirational story.

[monkumonku]

Hey, heavy makes you happy, you know. Sha na boom boom yeah.. ;D