|
|
Post by Boomzilla on May 31, 2015 2:32:56 GMT -5
I've owned the MC352 and the XPR-2. I preferred the Mac... ...so why did you prefer the MC352 over the XPR 2's? Now THAT'S a hard question to answer. My only answer would be that with my speakers, in my room, and to my ears, the Mac sounded airier in the treble. As to mono amps being bridged stereo amps - NO!When a stereo amp is bridged, the "minimum tolerable impedance" doubles. For example, if a stereo amp is rated for a 4-ohm minimum impedance per channel and you bridge it, then the bridged minimum impedance is 8-ohms. A mono amp is, rather, like a single channel of a stereo amp, but with all the transformer capacity and power supply capacitance of the (former) stereo amp now dedicated to a single channel. This is an over simplification, but in general, mono amps have: More output wattage capacity No inter-channel crosstalk Are (usually) quieter Safe for lower loudspeaker impedances and (often) better build quality novisnick started the "mono block society" for good reasons! Boom |
|
|
|
Post by qdtjni on May 31, 2015 3:10:14 GMT -5
I don't own either, I have two XPA-1 g2, which drives a pair of 804D. Admittedly, the XPR-1 has more power but the XPA-1 should be plenty to drive your 803Ds. So maybe that could be an alternative to consider too. Below a a quote from Emotiva sales, which led me to buying the XPA1g2s instead of XPR-2. "The XPA-1 Gen 2 monoblocks will offer even better audio performance than the XPR-2." |
|
|
|
Post by repeetavx on May 31, 2015 3:42:09 GMT -5
Speaking of being "fully balanced" what does it mean from an audio/sound perspective? I've heard of the term before but never quite understood what it does....are the XPR's fully balanced? Balanced means that you have two signals working through the system. A normal one, and an upside down one. Any noise that attaches itself to the signal will attach itself "right side up" to both signals. When the amp "reconciles" the two signals, anything that isn't both right side up and upside down at the same time is noise. A fully balanced amplifier will amplify the two complementary signals simultaneously and then "reconcile" the two signals just before it sends it to the speakers. Which means that it is really a two channel amplifier, with only one output. An "unbalanced" amplifier, with balanced inputs, will "reconcile" the signal after it receives it, Then amplify the "reconciled" signal for the speakers. The only amplifiers that Emotiva makes that are "fully balanced" are their higher end monoblocks. XPA-1L, XPA-1, XPR-1. |
|
|
|
Post by swissie on May 31, 2015 6:13:25 GMT -5
Speaking of being "fully balanced" what does it mean from an audio/sound perspective? I've heard of the term before but never quite understood what it does....are the XPR's fully balanced? Balanced means that you have two signals working through the system. A normal one, and an upside down one. Any noise that attaches itself to the signal will attach itself "right side up" to both signals. When the amp "reconciles" the two signals, anything that isn't both right side up and upside down at the same time is noise. A fully balanced amplifier will amplify the two complementary signals simultaneously and then "reconcile" the two signals just before it sends it to the speakers. Which means that it is really a two channel amplifier, with only one output. An "unbalanced" amplifier, with balanced inputs, will "reconcile" the signal after it receives it, Then amplify the "reconciled" signal for the speakers. The only amplifiers that Emotiva makes that are "fully balanced" are their higher end monoblocks. XPA-1L, XPA-1, XPR-1. |
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on May 31, 2015 7:02:25 GMT -5
Need and want are the two things in our hobby. The need part. Andrew Robinson explains it here with ease. You know what speakers you have, nominal impedance, and so on. Distance from the speakers to your listening position. Room size etc. Please view this link for his presentation on the need side of this choice. emotiva.com/guides/audio-video/audio-video-basics-power-amplifiersThe want side is how quiet is the Amp which basically is dead quiet as the night is black. The components ahead of the power amplifier will mostly determine any noise that ultimately comes out of the loudspeakers as an amplifier is a like magnifying glass to your music. Higher noise floor electronics ahead of the amplifier will mean, noise out of your speakers. An Amplifier faithfully reproduces without opinion, what it is fed into it. Noise or music ahead of the amplifier will be "amplified" to the speaker. Keith L. made a comment about noise in another thread here, and explains it well. It may have been in the Balanced Amplifier thread I believe. In sum, figuring your loudspeaker particulars, electronics "Ahead" of the power amplifier, your listening room environment, and distance from the speakers, you can determine which amplifier is best for you with also the reminder about some "Headroom" the Amplifier can provide when the content source plays demanding dynamic content. Any Emotiva Amplifier has headroom to spare. If you like lots of Headroom, the XPR-2 is amazing in what it does. Cousin to the highly rated XPR-1 Monoblocks, it is tough to go wrong with the XPR amplifiers. I had an XPA-2 with Magnaplaners, and it did well. My source, and electronics ahead of the power amplifier was quiet as can be. So background noise was not an issue. Remember, what ahead of your final output, will determine what the final output will be like in the end. As to your question to Mono blocks, Emotiva Fully Differntial Balanced amplifiers work this way in this link that Lonnie Vaughn explains here in the XSP-1 video. He shows the entire audio chain here on a diagram on this video presentation. emotiva.com/guides/audio-video/lonnie-vaughn-emotivas-xsp-1-gen-2-stereo-preamplifierHope all this helps. |
|
|
|
Post by vneal on May 31, 2015 8:29:50 GMT -5
blah blah blah
I would take the McIntosh amp
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on May 31, 2015 9:11:58 GMT -5
blah blah blah I would take the McIntosh amp Succinct.  |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 3,352
|
Post by Lsc on May 31, 2015 15:33:54 GMT -5
blah blah blah I would take the McIntosh amp I would have too if it was the same price  . I really like how it's made in the USA. |
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on May 31, 2015 19:31:38 GMT -5
You will potentially be able to sell the McIntosh for almost the same price 20 years from now....
|
|
|
|
Post by deltadube on May 31, 2015 19:35:40 GMT -5
Plus are most monoblocks true monos or are they just a bridged version of a stereo amp? fully balanced quad differential mono blocks is what you seek!!! xpr 1 .. or for the budget minded the xpa 1s sweet.. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on May 31, 2015 22:33:11 GMT -5
I wouldn't take the Macintosh amp even if I got it for free.
My reasons;
A pair of XPR-1's cost around half what an MC452 costs, they are kidding themselves
The MC452 is a whimp, only 452 watts, the XPR-1 is double that and then some into 8 ohms and triple that into 4 ohms.
The MC452 has those fugly metres and handles, yucko
The MC452 has a pissy damping factor of >40, the XPR-1 is >1,000, seriously no comparison
The MC452 at 0.005% has double the THD of the XPR-1 at 0.0025%, twice as much distortion, pooo
The MC452 has autoformers, really, a transformer coupled, solid state amp is totally oxymoronic
My view, buy a pair of XPR-1's, save half you budget and get twice the amplifier.
Cheers
Gary
|
|
|
|
Post by vneal on May 31, 2015 22:45:57 GMT -5
  Different strokes for different folks. I love the Mac meters and guess what you can turn them off |
|
|
|
Post by jackpine on May 31, 2015 22:50:25 GMT -5
I hope you meant for a little humor come through in your post Gary?
|
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on May 31, 2015 22:58:27 GMT -5
I wouldn't take the Macintosh amp even if I got it for free. My reasons; A pair of XPR-1's cost around half what an MC452 costs, they are kidding themselves The MC452 is a whimp, only 452 watts, the XPR-1 is double that and then some into 8 ohms and triple that into 4 ohms. The MC452 has those fugly metres and handles, yucko The MC452 has a pissy damping factor of >40, the XPR-1 is >1,000, seriously no comparison The MC452 at 0.005% has double the THD of the XPR-1 at 0.0025%, twice as much distortion, pooo The MC452 has autoformers, really, a transformer coupled, solid state amp is totally oxymoronic My view, buy a pair of XPR-1's, save half you budget and get twice the amplifier. Cheers Gary Yeah but if you got the McIntosh amp for free, then basic math tells you that's a lot cheaper than the XPR-1. I'd take a free McIntosh amp any day over an XPR-1 that I had to pay for.  |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on May 31, 2015 23:34:15 GMT -5
I hope you meant for a little humor come through in your post Gary? Only a little Yeah but if you got the McIntosh amp for free, then basic math tells you that's a lot cheaper than the XPR-1. I'd take a free McIntosh amp any day over an XPR-1 that I had to pay for. I wouldn't take it, as in home, I might resell it without ever having had to look at it or listen to it. That way I could deny ever having actually owned it.  Cheers Gary Cheers Gary |
|
cawgijoe
Emo VIPs
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it." - Yogi Berra
Posts: 4,927
|
Post by cawgijoe on Jun 1, 2015 7:05:21 GMT -5
I wouldn't take the Macintosh amp even if I got it for free. My reasons; A pair of XPR-1's cost around half what an MC452 costs, they are kidding themselves The MC452 is a whimp, only 452 watts, the XPR-1 is double that and then some into 8 ohms and triple that into 4 ohms. The MC452 has those fugly metres and handles, yucko The MC452 has a pissy damping factor of >40, the XPR-1 is >1,000, seriously no comparison The MC452 at 0.005% has double the THD of the XPR-1 at 0.0025%, twice as much distortion, pooo The MC452 has autoformers, really, a transformer coupled, solid state amp is totally oxymoronic My view, buy a pair of XPR-1's, save half you budget and get twice the amplifier. Cheers Gary I'd still take one for free! |
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Jun 1, 2015 8:34:20 GMT -5
I wouldn't take the Macintosh amp even if I got it for free. My reasons; A pair of XPR-1's cost around half what an MC452 costs, they are kidding themselves The MC452 is a whimp, only 452 watts, the XPR-1 is double that and then some into 8 ohms and triple that into 4 ohms. The MC452 has those fugly metres and handles, yucko The MC452 has a pissy damping factor of >40, the XPR-1 is >1,000, seriously no comparison The MC452 at 0.005% has double the THD of the XPR-1 at 0.0025%, twice as much distortion, pooo The MC452 has autoformers, really, a transformer coupled, solid state amp is totally oxymoronic My view, buy a pair of XPR-1's, save half you budget and get twice the amplifier. Cheers Gary I am sure I can see the THD difference but I sure won't be able to hear it.... |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 1, 2015 8:46:27 GMT -5
...A pair of XPR-1's cost around half what an MC452 costs, they are kidding themselves No argument The MC452 is a whimp, only 452 watts, the XPR-1 is double that and then some into 8 ohms and triple that into 4 ohms. True also The MC452 has those fugly metres and handles, yucko In matters of taste, there can be no dispute. The MC452 has a pissy damping factor of >40, the XPR-1 is >1,000, seriously no comparison Sometimes numbers lie - The effective damping is never the theoretical number. The MC452 at 0.005% has double the THD of the XPR-1 at 0.0025%, twice as much distortion, pooo And some other amps have even higher. Below the audible threshold, this doesn't matter. The 1970's Technics by Panasonic receivers outdid both these amps by several orders of magnitude. Did that make them sound better? Nope. The MC452 has autoformers, really, a transformer coupled, solid state amp is totally oxymoronic Here, Gary, you've missed the boat. There ARE virtues to transformer coupling. Most manufacturers don't bother because of the cost. Nevertheless... My view, buy a pair of XPR-1's, save half you budget and get twice the amplifier. And on paper, you're absolutely right. If you're buying by specs, then there's no question that the Emotiva is the better bargain. If you're buying for durability, longevity, and sound, however... The answer is not so clear. Note that several of us who have actually owned Mac gear indicate that we might actually prefer the Mac. Unless you've actually tried one, don't be mislead by specs and theories. If you want to spend that much, McIntosh is definitely a serious contender. Respectfully - Boomzilla |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,352
|
Post by Lsc on Jun 1, 2015 11:49:39 GMT -5
I wouldn't take it, as in home, I might resell it without ever having had to look at it or listen to it. That way I could deny ever having actually owned it. Cheers Gary That's a great idea. Because you may then start upgrading everything else to get the best out of the Mac. |
|
|
|
Post by audiosyndrome on Jun 1, 2015 12:45:26 GMT -5
I recommend joining the mono block society,,, skipping the stereo amps and jumping up to the big dog mono blocks.... fully balance quad differential mono blocks eh in theory the silence you seek!!!! cheers.. What kind of monos do you use? I would love monos but space limitations and power requirements (20amp) would be an issue especially with the XPR 1's. I like to keep my system neat and tidy. If I get monos, there'll be a total of 3 Amps including the XPR 5 next to my main left speaker stacked high. stanlee- three amps are for sissies; a real man needs FIVE amps. LOL Russ  |
|
. I really like how it's made in the USA.
