|
|
Post by eirik84 on Sept 5, 2012 6:36:34 GMT -5
UPA-200
8 ohms: 2 x 125 watts
4 ohms: 2 x 200 watts
XPA-200
8 ohms: 2 x 140 watts
4 ohms: 2 x 225 watts
What will be the benefits of choosing the XPA-200 over the UPA-200?
I guess I wont hear much difference between 200 and 225 watts ? (I have 4 ohm speakers)
Or will the SQ be better with the XPA ?
|
|
|
|
Post by stads77 on Sept 5, 2012 7:05:52 GMT -5
where did you get those specs on the xpa-200?
|
|
|
|
Post by eirik84 on Sept 5, 2012 7:13:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by stads77 on Sept 5, 2012 8:17:22 GMT -5
Thx, I was expecting something near the 200 watt range into 8 ohms, bummer. It would be hard for me to buy one if a used upa-2 can be had for $200 less. I can't imagine the SQ is that much better, is it?
|
|
|
|
Post by eirik84 on Sept 5, 2012 15:29:56 GMT -5
No opinions?
|
|
|
|
Post by briank on Sept 5, 2012 15:33:11 GMT -5
Since the XPA-200 isn't available yet, there's no way to offer an opinion about SQ. All we know at the moment is you get a little more power with the XPA-200 so you might notice a slight improvement in dynamics but that's just speculation at the moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Porscheguy on Sept 5, 2012 15:45:37 GMT -5
There will be no SQ difference IMHO. All these amps sound the same. It's Emotiva's "new and improved model"
All well made class AB amps should sound the same.... I find it interesting that so many people ask this.
You also need to pretty much double the power to make any effectible change in dynamics - so 25 or 50 watts is meaningless...
Really...
|
|
|
|
Post by crypto69 on Sept 5, 2012 15:57:56 GMT -5
I picked up a new UPA-200 at Emofest this past weekend for around $250 and it sounds great. I won an XDA-1 in a Emofest raffle and decided to build a 2-channel system around it which I have always wanted to do. I had some Onix Rocket RS760's which were in storage awaiting completion of my basement HT that I am using as mains (using a Squeezebox 1 as a source streaming from my home server). Couldn't be happier with both the XDA-1 and the UPA-200 combo.  -Matt |
|
|
|
Post by eirik84 on Sept 5, 2012 23:15:57 GMT -5
I picked up a new UPA-200 at Emofest this past weekend for around $250 and it sounds great. I won an XDA-1 in a Emofest raffle and decided to build a 2-channel system around it which I have always wanted to do. I had some Onix Rocket RS760's which were in storage awaiting completion of my basement HT that I am using as mains (using a Squeezebox 1 as a source streaming from my home server). Couldn't be happier with both the XDA-1 and the UPA-200 combo. -Matt Thanks for your input! Planning to use either XPA-200 or UPA-200 with the XDA-2 myself |
|
|
|
Post by eirik84 on Sept 6, 2012 3:50:38 GMT -5
There will be no SQ difference IMHO. All these amps sound the same. It's Emotiva's "new and improved model" All well made class AB amps should sound the same.... I find it interesting that so many people ask this. You also need to pretty much double the power to make any effectible change in dynamics - so 25 or 50 watts is meaningless... Really... Thanks for answering. I just asked because it makes no sense that Emotiva release two amps with no other difference than 15 watts in 8 ohms and 25 watts in 4 ohms - and charge $150 extra ? |
|
|
|
Post by paintedklown on Sept 6, 2012 4:08:17 GMT -5
There will be no SQ difference IMHO. All these amps sound the same. It's Emotiva's "new and improved model" All well made class AB amps should sound the same.... I find it interesting that so many people ask this. You also need to pretty much double the power to make any effectible change in dynamics - so 25 or 50 watts is meaningless... Really... Thanks for answering. I just asked because it makes no sense that Emotiva release two amps with no other difference than 15 watts in 8 ohms and 25 watts in 4 ohms - and charge $150 extra ? In addition to more watts, I believe that you will also have XLR connections, beefier power supplies, more output devices  , upgraded speaker terminals, (possible) tiffany style RCA input upgrades, and beefier heat sinks so fans aren't needed. If I have any of that info mixed up, please forgive me as I have been overloaded with all the info on the upcoming products.  Now the big question is. Do all of these differences add up to be worth the additional cost? Only you can decide. |
|
|
|
Post by eirik84 on Sept 6, 2012 5:12:37 GMT -5
Thanks for answering. I just asked because it makes no sense that Emotiva release two amps with no other difference than 15 watts in 8 ohms and 25 watts in 4 ohms - and charge $150 extra ? In addition to more watts, I believe that you will also have XLR connections, beefier power supplies, more output devices , upgraded speaker terminals, (possible) tiffany style RCA input upgrades, and beefier heat sinks so fans aren't needed. If I have any of that info mixed up, please forgive me as I have been overloaded with all the info on the upcoming products. Now the big question is. Do all of these differences add up to be worth the additional cost? Only you can decide. Thanks for your input - XLR is usually nice, but since the amp isnt truly balanced it wont give any increased SQ. - Bigger power supply - watts increased by max 25 watts in 4 ohms, how much bigger can it actually be? - Better quality on RCA-connector is a big plus - Heatsinks only instead of fans is also very good, but have'nt heard any owners of the new UPA-series complain about the fans either BUT, this is HiFi - so many upgrades are just for "bragging-rights" and not for increased SQ only |
|
|
|
Post by paintedklown on Sept 6, 2012 5:24:00 GMT -5
You're welcome, and you are absolutely correct about there being an element of "bragging rights". In some circles, that does play a role in gear selection. It seems that actual SQ occasionally "takes a back seat" to spec sheets and lists of features. From time to time I wonder if I would hear an readily audible difference if my entire system (aside from speakers) were to be swapped out for other gear. It certainly would be an interesting (and fun) experiment. |
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Sept 6, 2012 7:07:22 GMT -5
I agree with painted... after a certain point the law of diminishing returns kicks into high gear, especially since most people can't tell junk from high quality anyway. I think it would be hard to be unsatisfied with _any_ amp from emotiva; I have the 50 watt mini (connected to some paradigm monitor's) and I'm more than 100% satisfied with the little thing, and I'm quite sure that purchasing a UPA or XPA would just give me the ability to go louder, which I would never use (of course, my speakers are quite easy to drive too, so that does make a difference here). I mean I'm sure there is a slight increase in sound quality (especially if moving to an xpa), but if I'm honest with myself,, I know I'll never hear the difference, even if it is slightly measurable |
|
bootman
Emo VIPs 
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Sept 6, 2012 9:24:56 GMT -5
I would wait until official specs are posted on the Emotiva website vs a forum post by non emotiva employees before further speculating on the differences.
|
|
|
|
Post by eirik84 on Sept 6, 2012 10:43:06 GMT -5
I would wait until official specs are posted on the Emotiva website vs a forum post by non emotiva employees before further speculating on the differences. Good advice |
|
|
|
Post by burn on Sept 14, 2012 20:33:54 GMT -5
Hmmm, the specs on the site are saying that the xpa-200 is 120 vs the upa-200 at 125 at 8ohm.
Seems like a odd strategy. or a typo?
|
|
Erwin.BE
Emo VIPs
It's the room, stupid!
Posts: 2,259
|
Post by Erwin.BE on Sept 15, 2012 9:09:02 GMT -5
Hmmm, the specs on the site are saying that the xpa-200 is 120 vs the upa-200 at 125 at 8ohm. Seems like a odd strategy. or a typo? XPA-200: 90,000 uF of storage capacitance UPA-200: 40,000 uF of storage capacitance. This means the XPA-200 can respond faster to the demands of the music program. You can compare this with the small amount of power that's stored in our muscles. It lets you react fast, like when you put your hand on a hot object. But for a longer effort (like carrying an Emo amp to your rack) the blood will have to transport energy to the muscle. That is to be compared to the power ratings. weight: 31lb (XPA-200) vs 24 lb (UPA-200) Always a good thing to check the weight. The new nine-amp Denon AVR 4520 weighs only 16 kg. No way is it producing the 150 Watt @ 8 ohm they specced. XPA-200 is just a more audiophile amp. Never mind the power ratings. Not very important. |
|
|
|
Post by eirik84 on Sept 15, 2012 9:45:52 GMT -5
Hmmm, the specs on the site are saying that the xpa-200 is 120 vs the upa-200 at 125 at 8ohm. Seems like a odd strategy. or a typo? XPA-200: 90,000 uF of storage capacitance UPA-200: 40,000 uF of storage capacitance. This means the XPA-200 can respond faster to the demands of the music program. You can compare this with the small amount of power that's stored in our muscles. It lets you react fast, like when you put your hand on a hot object. But for a longer effort (like carrying an Emo amp to your rack) the blood will have to transport energy to the muscle. That is to be compared to the power ratings. weight: 31lb (XPA-200) vs 24 lb (UPA-200) Always a good thing to check the weight. The new nine-amp Denon AVR 4520 weighs only 16 kg. No way is it producing the 150 Watt @ 8 ohm they specced. XPA-200 is just a more audiophile amp. Never mind the power ratings. Not very important. XPA-2 has only 45 000 uF.. Does this mean that XPA-200 is a better amp since it is "quicker"? Can the difference be that the XPA-2 has bigger caps that are "slower" than the ones in the XPA-200? |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 15, 2012 10:11:27 GMT -5
|
|
, upgraded speaker terminals, (possible) tiffany style RCA input upgrades, and beefier heat sinks so fans aren't needed. If I have any of that info mixed up, please forgive me as I have been overloaded with all the info on the upcoming products. 
