|
|
Post by yessurf on Sept 20, 2014 5:35:43 GMT -5
Hi everybody,
my project with my Cambridge Audio CA 651R failed. I wanted a professional technician to separate the power amp section (FL / FR + SBL / SBR) from the pre amp ones to be able to loop in my ATM 102, a speaker specific bass module / amplifier switch (lowers the frequency to 24hz) also with bi-amping for a maximum of dynamics. He just wasn't able to do it with my unit, even though he did it successfully with various other AVRs.
I already own the XDA-2, which runs as a DAC as the moment because the Stereo DAC of the 651R didn't convince me. I am very happy with my XDA-2 and since it is also a very good digital pre amp I want to create a pure stereo system within my home audio system. This will enable me to connect the 651R FL / FR pre outs and the XDA-2 pre outs with the ATM 102 and the with the main ins of the power amp. I would be able to use my full speaker capacity for stereo and surround then.
To cut a long story short, I need a very good and powerful power amp.
Emotiva dropped the price of the XPA-1L, so buying two XPA-1 Ls is only slightly more expensive than one XPA-2. Depending partly on the shipping costs to Germany.
Has anybody here compared the XPA-2 gen 2 to the XPA-1L?
So long
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 20, 2014 6:27:56 GMT -5
geebo has. He found it an improvement. IMO the DC-1 would also help driving the larger power amps.
|
|
geebo
Emo VIPs 
"Too bad that all the people who know how to run the country are driving taxicabs and cutting hair"
Posts: 24,188
Member is Online
|
Post by geebo on Sept 20, 2014 8:48:47 GMT -5
I had an XPA-2 Gen 1 and will say it's an incredible amplifier with lots of impact and headroom. But the XPA-1Ls give up nothing to the XPA-2. Although I admit I cannot hear a difference when switching between class A and A/B operation I must say there is something special when listening late at night in a quiet darkened room to some good quality 2 channel recordings through the XMC-1 and amps switched to Class A. That said, I usually keep them in A/B mode except for those special listening moments. In A/B mode, they are at least the equal of the XPA-2. Dead silent and very fast, they also run a bit warmer in A/B mode than the XPA-2 and considerably warmer in A mode. I would recommend them over the 2 but you wouldn't be disappointed with either, I promise you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Sept 20, 2014 10:36:21 GMT -5
I've owned both. I've loved both. Currently, I'm with the XPA-1L amps. You'd not be disappointed with either.
|
|
|
|
Post by repeetavx on Sept 20, 2014 11:25:24 GMT -5
The XPA-1L is fully balanced internally. That is that if the line level signal is received as a balanced signal, then it remains balanced internally until the final amplification. The XPA-2 converts the balanced signal (subtracting the noise) at the input stage and then does all of its amplification.
The XPA-2 has a 1200 Volt/Amp transformer with 600 Volt/Amps available to each channel. The XPA-1L has a 450 Volt/Amp transformer.
The XPA-2 weighs 72.5 lbs. and requires a healthy person to move it around. The XPA-1L weighs almost exactly half of that at 35 lbs. and can be moved by most anyone.
I will defer to the testimonies of others as regarding their sound differences.
|
|
geebo
Emo VIPs
"Too bad that all the people who know how to run the country are driving taxicabs and cutting hair"
Posts: 24,188
Member is Online
|
Post by geebo on Sept 20, 2014 11:56:16 GMT -5
The XPA-1L is fully balanced internally. That is that if the line level signal is received as a balanced signal, then it remains balanced internally until the final amplification. The XPA-2 converts the balanced signal (subtracting the noise) at the input stage and then does all of its amplification. The XPA-2 has a 1200 Volt/Amp transformer with 600 Volt/Amps available to each channel. The XPA-1L has a 450 Volt/Amp transformer. The XPA-2 weighs 72.5 lbs. and requires a healthy person to move it around. The XPA-1L weighs almost exactly half of that at 35 lbs. and can be moved by most anyone. I will defer to the testimonies of others as regarding their sound differences. And the XPA-1L has 90,000 uF secondary capacitance each (180,000 for a stereo pair) vs 45,000 uF in the XPA-2 or 4 times as much for two channels. |
|
|
|
Post by yessurf on Sept 20, 2014 12:18:25 GMT -5
Thanks for the replies,
the weight factor is something I have thought about, too, even though the shipping costs for one XPA-2 are identical with two XPA-Ls.
Is their a audible Class A difference especially at very low levels?
Has anybody specific information whether and when the XPA-1L will get the gen 2 upgrade?
So long
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 20, 2014 13:04:13 GMT -5
The XPA-1L is fully balanced internally. That is that if the line level signal is received as a balanced signal, then it remains balanced internally until the final amplification. The XPA-2 converts the balanced signal (subtracting the noise) at the input stage and then does all of its amplification. The XPA-2 has a 1200 Volt/Amp transformer with 600 Volt/Amps available to each channel. The XPA-1L has a 450 Volt/Amp transformer. The XPA-2 weighs 72.5 lbs. and requires a healthy person to move it around. The XPA-1L weighs almost exactly half of that at 35 lbs. and can be moved by most anyone. I will defer to the testimonies of others as regarding their sound differences. And the XPA-1L has 90,000 uF secondary capacitance each (180,000 for a stereo pair) vs 45,000 uF in the XPA-2 or 4 times as much for two channels. Interestingly according to this review the XPA-2 has 12 15,000 mf capacitors. www.audioholics.com/amplifier-reviews/emotiva-xpa-2/xpa-2-two-setupAnd it has about 120,000 or 180,000 mf. But it is wired in such a way that you get 45,000 out of the 180,000. I think it's wired in series. |
|
|
|
Post by Dark Ranger on Sept 20, 2014 13:11:18 GMT -5
There's a lot of great feedback in this thread, so let me add a couple other things to consider. Although the XPA-1L amp is 2RU (rack units) tall, you would have two of them. The XPA-2 is 4RU tall, but it is a single amp. Some folks will prefer a physically larger, heavier amp to keep the amount of gear to a minimum. Others (such as myself) prefer several physically smaller, lighter amps for maximum flexibility, placement options, and load distribution and don't mind needing more shelves to hold those amps. Regarding power output, don't let the smaller 450 VA transformer worry you too much. Remember that the XPA-1L is a monoblock amplifier. It powers only one speaker and all of that juice and storage capacitance is available for just one speaker. It also offers a fully-differential signal path which pairs well with Emotiva's fully-differential preamps/DACs (e.g. XSP-1, XMC-1, XDA-2, Stealth DC-1). Granted, this feature doesn't carry significant weight compared to other attributes, but it's still worth mentioning. Per your question about Class A at lower volumes, personally I've not been able to tell any (statistically significant) difference between high-bias and low-bias modes. It then follows that I haven't heard any difference even at lower volumes. Depending on speaker sensitivity, I'd argue that you actually might be running in Class A at lower volumes, even when the switch is in "Class A/B" mode. All Class A/B amplifiers run in Class A in the lower regions of their power handling. Depending how the amplifier is designed, some A/B amps might run the first 0.2 or 0.5 watts in Class A while others might run the first 1-2 watts (or more) in Class A before transitioning to A/B. Since the XPA-1L runs fairly warm in A/B (low bias) mode, I'd be willing to bet that it's still biased higher than many of Emotiva's other amplifiers. Seriously, Lonnie & Co. did such a good job with this amplifier that it sounds spectacular in either operating mode. I run mine in low-bias mode 99.9% of the time for lower heat output/power consumption and haven't missed a thing. I switch over to high-bias for special occasions.  Both the XPA-1L and XPA-2 are fantastic amplifiers. The XPA-2 is one of the most popular stereo amplifiers Emotiva ever created. I doubt you'll be disappointed with either based on SQ alone, but there are other factors to consider. My honest suggestion is to try and rank those other factors to help you make a better decision. In my case, I wanted a lighter, 2RU monoblock amp with fully-differential circuitry, so the 1L was a no-brainer. I have no regrets after owning this model for 18 months. |
|
geebo
Emo VIPs
"Too bad that all the people who know how to run the country are driving taxicabs and cutting hair"
Posts: 24,188
Member is Online
|
Post by geebo on Sept 20, 2014 13:21:50 GMT -5
And the XPA-1L has 90,000 uF secondary capacitance each (180,000 for a stereo pair) vs 45,000 uF in the XPA-2 or 4 times as much for two channels. Interestingly according to this review the XPA-2 has 12 15,000 mf capacitors. www.audioholics.com/amplifier-reviews/emotiva-xpa-2/xpa-2-two-setupAnd it has about 120,000 or 180,000 mf. But it is wired in such a way that you get 45,000 out of the 180,000. I think it's wired in series. It has effective capacitance of 45,000 uF and is wired that way to increase the voltage capacity to 100 volts. I suppose this may be necessary because in order to put out 500 watts into 4 ohms you need 44 volts volts and with two channels 88 volts. With the 1L having only one channel the voltage demand on the power supply would be 44 volts to meet it's output spec. At least that's why I think the capacitors are wired that way in the XPA-2. I love to learn the real reason if that's not it. |
|
|
|
Post by Dark Ranger on Sept 20, 2014 13:30:22 GMT -5
I forgot to mention one additional spec in my last post. I've been researching for the past 10 minutes trying to find confirmation, but haven't had success yet. I will probably send an e-mail to Emotiva.
The XPA-2 has 12 output devices per channel (at least the Gen1 model did). I could have sworn the XPA-1L had more. The number "18" seems to flash in my head for some reason, but I cannot locate a source for that. I'll double-check with Emotiva and report back. If this is true (and I'm pretty sure the XPA-1L has more output devices than the XPA-2, whatever that number ends up being), this is another advantage for the 1L: more current, better control, etc.
|
|
geebo
Emo VIPs
"Too bad that all the people who know how to run the country are driving taxicabs and cutting hair"
Posts: 24,188
Member is Online
|
Post by geebo on Sept 20, 2014 14:14:34 GMT -5
I forgot to mention one additional spec in my last post. I've been researching for the past 10 minutes trying to find confirmation, but haven't had success yet. I will probably send an e-mail to Emotiva. The XPA-2 has 12 output devices per channel (at least the Gen1 model did). I could have sworn the XPA-1L had more. The number "18" seems to flash in my head for some reason, but I cannot locate a source for that. I'll double-check with Emotiva and report back. If this is true (and I'm pretty sure the XPA-1L has more output devices than the XPA-2, whatever that number ends up being), this is another advantage for the 1L: more current, better control, etc. In the photo on the website it looks like 16. |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Sept 20, 2014 14:23:00 GMT -5
Although the XPA-2 is a taller, heavier amp, it requires longer speaker wires. When I tried long-interconnects/short-speaker-wires and vice versa, the bass was superior with the former configuration. So if you run your speakers full-range, I'd recommend the mono blocks. If, on the other hand, you use a subwoofer below 80 Hz or so, then the main advantage of the short speaker wires is lost, and either configuration should sound equally good. That's the main difference I hear between the two options. Although I currently run my system in 2.1 configuration, I may someday opt for speakers that make the sub obsolete. In case that happens, I've gotten the mono blocks as "just in case" insurance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dark Ranger on Sept 20, 2014 14:33:29 GMT -5
In the photo on the website it looks like 16. I just checked out the photo and you may be right about that. It certainly looks that way. In any case, I've inquired about that via e-mail along with one other thing. |
|
|
|
Post by repeetavx on Sept 20, 2014 15:42:27 GMT -5
Although the XPA-2 is a taller, heavier amp, it requires longer speaker wires. When I tried long-interconnects/short-speaker-wires and vice versa, the bass was superior with the former configuration. So if you run your speakers full-range, I'd recommend the mono blocks. If, on the other hand, you use a subwoofer below 80 Hz or so, then the main advantage of the short speaker wires is lost, and either configuration should sound equally good. That's the main difference I hear between the two options. By experimentation I have found that short speaker wire makes a difference at about 100hz and below in my system. |
|
|
|
Post by yessurf on Sept 20, 2014 16:06:08 GMT -5
Wow what a feedback in this thread.
Thanks for all the good input. @dark ranger, you made a very good point with the flexibility aspect. In my rack the XPA-2 could only take a bottom position and its 4RU height leaves not much space above it.
So the weight and form factor are especially important for my rack. The ATM turns my speakers into full range ones and makes the sub obsolete in my system and so I think the XPA-1L is the better choice. Each speaker has got its own fully balanced discrete amp. Feels somehow better and more high end.
If the price for the XPA-1L stays for a while like that I think I start saving my pocket money and go with a pair of those. Optically they match absolut perfectly to my XDA-2.
So long
|
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Sept 20, 2014 16:30:33 GMT -5
Wow what a feedback in this thread. Thanks for all the good input. @dark ranger, you made a very good point with the flexibility aspect. In my rack the XPA-2 could only take a bottom position and its 4RU height leaves not much space above it. So the weight and form factor are especially important for my rack. The ATM turns my speakers into full range ones and makes the sub obsolete in my system and so I think the XPA-1L is the better choice. Each speaker has got its own fully balanced discrete amp. Feels somehow better and more high end. If the price for the XPA-1L stays for a while like that I think I start saving my pocket money and go with a pair of those. Optically they match absolut perfectly to my XDA-2. So long XPA-1L is the way to go! |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Sept 20, 2014 20:08:59 GMT -5
And if you place the 1Ls near the speakers, the rack considerations go away...
|
|
|
|
Post by ocezam on Sept 22, 2014 7:59:45 GMT -5
I have no regrets after owning this model for 18 months. I had to think about this one for a moment. Jeez it really has been a year and a half since XPA-1L roll out. Man time flies AND I am getting old! |
|
|
|
Post by ac2011 on Sept 22, 2014 10:00:39 GMT -5
I am also considering getting some XPA-1L's. I currently run my L/C/R off an XPA-3 (Gen 1), but I am looking at upgrading my speakers to a brand/model that is spec'd to 400W max power level.
Seems the XPA-1L's are on clearance, to make way for newer version; anyone have any idea what difference(s) the Gen 2 might have? Is it worth waiting for the new version or just grabbing the Gen 1 at the quite nice price?
|
|
