abd1
Minor Hero
Posts: 29
|
Post by abd1 on Feb 6, 2017 12:55:55 GMT -5
I currently have XPA-100 monoblocks for my L/R speakers. A friend of a friend is offering to sell me his XPA-2 for around $330. I know the XPA-2 has more power but I don't listen at super high volumes and don't plan if ever having speakers that are that difficult to drive. Plus I think the CPA-100's can drive almost anything. Is there anything else in the design of the XPA-2 that will give me better sound quality? I mean for the price I could get it I could sell the XPA-100's and come out ahead $100-$200. Other than that is there a reason I should switch to the XPA-2?
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Feb 6, 2017 13:08:02 GMT -5
I've heard the UPA-1 (the old version of the XPA-100) and the UPA-2. And the XPA-2. The XPA-2 is closer to the XPA-1. The main difference I heard between the UPA-1 and XPA-2 is that the XPA-2 sounded faster. There was less smearing in dynamics. The sound just appeared. I didn't realize the UPA-2 produced smearing - until I heard the XPA-2. There was more bass extension. The soundstage was also better - but it's hard to say in what way. I think it had to do with microdynamics. $330 is a GREAT price for them.
Having said that....there is a substantial portion of people who for various reasons do not hear differences between electronics. If you happen to be one of those people or that has been your experience so far, then most likely you won't hear any difference between the two.
|
|
hemster
Global Moderator
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,920
|
Post by hemster on Feb 6, 2017 13:28:18 GMT -5
abd1, if I were you, I'd stick with the monoblocks. Given your listening preference, I doubt you'd hear a difference.
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Feb 6, 2017 14:44:08 GMT -5
Buy it and see if you hear a difference (could be tough); sell whichever you like less as you shouldn't have any problem getting rid of the XPA-2 for similar $$. Or keep it for later usage since that's a pretty great deal.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Feb 6, 2017 16:05:43 GMT -5
One of the big advantages with mono blocks is the ability to locate them close by their respective speaker, i.e. short speaker cables and long interconnects. The XPA-100's have XLR input connections so induced noise isn't an issue. As you can see from my signature I use an XPA-100 to drive a subwoofer in exactly that configuration, result being the best subwoofer sound quality I have ever had. Don't underestimate the XPA-100.
Cheers Gary
|
|
|
Post by vneal on Feb 6, 2017 16:10:22 GMT -5
Go for the monoblocs
Someone please explain to me how an amp sounds faster
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Feb 6, 2017 16:12:15 GMT -5
Go for the monoblocs Someone please explain to me how an amp sounds faster When a sound occurs, it produces it with less smearing than the comparable amp. So when a sound gets loud, both amps will get equally loud. But to get to that volume, the faster amp will get to it faster. It tends to sound clearer to me when it does that.
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Feb 6, 2017 16:12:18 GMT -5
Go for the monoblocs Someone please explain to me how an amp sounds faster Yes, has anyone played an identical CD track through both amps to see if one actually finishes before the other one does? My opinion, put on a blindfold and under the circumstances described by the OP you're not going to be able to tell an XPA-100 from an XPA-2.
|
|
abd1
Minor Hero
Posts: 29
|
Post by abd1 on Feb 6, 2017 16:22:17 GMT -5
Thanks for the input. I'm going to purchase the XPA-2 as long as it's not already sold. I figure at this price I can test it and sell it if needed. My main question is if there's any quality difference between the amps' construction other than more power in the XPA-2. Other than that, and a larger chassis, does it have better internal wiring, capacitors, resistors, etc. to make it a better sounding product? If it's just power then I think mono's will be better. We'll see.
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Feb 6, 2017 16:30:35 GMT -5
Thanks for the input. I'm going to purchase the XPA-2 as long as it's not already sold. I figure at this price I can test it and sell it if needed. My main question is if there's any quality difference between the amps' construction other than more power in the XPA-2. Other than that, and a larger chassis, does it have better internal wiring, capacitors, resistors, etc. to make it a better sounding product? If it's just power then I think mono's will be better. We'll see. Uh yeah! The XPA-2 has close to the same parts as the XPA-1. Think of it like the stereo version of the XPA-1. So think heavy build quality. Which includes more capacitance and 1200 KVA torroidal transformer. It also was supposed to have been given a bit extra class A power than the other models. It can also be bridged. Which generation are you looking at? The gen 2 also has some small tweaks to its power supply and improved RCA connectors and a lower gain. www.audioholics.com/amplifier-reviews/emotiva-xpa-2
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Feb 6, 2017 16:56:50 GMT -5
Go for the monoblocs Someone please explain to me how an amp sounds faster When a sound occurs, it produces it with less smearing than the comparable amp. So when a sound gets loud, both amps will get equally loud. But to get to that volume, the faster amp will get to it faster. It tends to sound clearer to me when it does that. I get what you're trying to say. But is there any comments from Lonnie/KeithL which can back this up? Not trying to be a smart-xxx, just genuinely curious. Because I'm sure the time we're talking about here must be in nanoseconds of difference; kind of like how a human is not capable of spotting difference b/n 120hz refresh rate on TV versus 121hz. I have 2 mini's which I've never thought about upgrading, simply because I view them as "reduced power versions of an xpa-2". If I'm wrong, and there are more sonic benefits to something like an xpa over a mini then I might upgrade. But I kind of want some hard evidence of this My mini's have an easy life, volume knob is never turned up more than 60% (actually they are set permanently at 60% and I control volume on my desk with a passive volume knob) so I doubt an increase in watts alone would be something I could use.
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Feb 6, 2017 17:11:30 GMT -5
When a sound occurs, it produces it with less smearing than the comparable amp. So when a sound gets loud, both amps will get equally loud. But to get to that volume, the faster amp will get to it faster. It tends to sound clearer to me when it does that. I get what you're trying to say. But is there any comments from Lonnie/KeithL which can back this up? Not trying to be a smart-xxx, just genuinely curious. Because I'm sure the time we're talking about here must be in nanoseconds of difference; kind of like how a human is not capable of spotting difference b/n 120hz refresh rate on TV versus 121hz. I have 2 mini's which I've never thought about upgrading, simply because I view them as "reduced power versions of an xpa-2". If I'm wrong, and there are more sonic benefits to something like an xpa over a mini then I might upgrade. But I kind of want some hard evidence of this My mini's have an easy life, volume knob is never turned up more than 60% (actually they are set permanently at 60% and I control volume on my desk with a passive volume knob) so I doubt an increase in watts alone would be something I could use. Lonnie commented one time on my impressions about the XPA-2 being a faster amp. It seemed like he agreed and he said he gave it a faster slew rate. I can't guarantee you'll hear a difference. These are my subjective impressions. You may have a different experience.
|
|
abd1
Minor Hero
Posts: 29
|
Post by abd1 on Feb 6, 2017 17:13:15 GMT -5
Thanks for the input. I'm going to purchase the XPA-2 as long as it's not already sold. I figure at this price I can test it and sell it if needed. My main question is if there's any quality difference between the amps' construction other than more power in the XPA-2. Other than that, and a larger chassis, does it have better internal wiring, capacitors, resistors, etc. to make it a better sounding product? If it's just power then I think mono's will be better. We'll see. Uh yeah! The XPA-2 has close to the same parts as the XPA-1. Think of it like the stereo version of the XPA-1. So think heavy build quality. Which includes more capacitance and 1200 KVA torroidal transformer. It also was supposed to have been given a bit extra class A power than the other models. It can also be bridged. Which generation are you looking at? The gen 2 also has some small tweaks to its power supply and improved RCA connectors and a lower gain. www.audioholics.com/amplifier-reviews/emotiva-xpa-2Thanks, this is the info I've been looking for. Mechanically what is better about the XPA-2 that will result in better sound? Now, while it may have a better transformer and more capacitance will it be 2X better since each XPA-100 has its own transformer and power supply. We'll have to see.
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Feb 6, 2017 17:24:20 GMT -5
Uh yeah! The XPA-2 has close to the same parts as the XPA-1. Think of it like the stereo version of the XPA-1. So think heavy build quality. Which includes more capacitance and 1200 KVA torroidal transformer. It also was supposed to have been given a bit extra class A power than the other models. It can also be bridged. Which generation are you looking at? The gen 2 also has some small tweaks to its power supply and improved RCA connectors and a lower gain. www.audioholics.com/amplifier-reviews/emotiva-xpa-2Thanks, this is the info I've been looking for. Mechanically what is better about the XPA-2 that will result in better sound? Now, while it may have a better transformer and more capacitance will it be 2X better since each XPA-100 has its own transformer and power supply. We'll have to see. No it's not 2x better. But it's the better amp. (I'm basing this off my UPA-1 experience, though from what I gather the XPA-100 sounds a bit better than the UPA-1). The only amp I've heard better than the XPA-2 is the XPA-1. I've heard a few amps that get close to the XPA-2 but in different ways. So it's hard to compare. Most of them have been tube amps which lack the speed but do a nice job with sound stage and an immersive feel to the music.
|
|
|
Post by teaman on Feb 6, 2017 17:42:29 GMT -5
I have owned plenty of Emotiva amps and I have never noticed much of a difference between any of them. I have owned the UPA-1, UPA-2, UPA-200, XPA-1 Gen 1, XPA-1 Gen 2, XPA-2 Gen 1, XPA-2 Gen 2.
Of course the higher powered amps have more headroom but if you are only listening at moderate levels you won't notice any difference. Biggest difference I found was going from Gen 1 to Gen 2. I like the higher gain structure (32db) of the Gen 1 amps over the (29db) gain of the Gen 2. I also found no difference at all between the supposed Class A and Class A/B of the XPA-1's as far as sound, a little hotter under Class A conditions.
For my Gen 1 vs Gen 2 the main difference was that I had to get about three LED meter lights coming on while using the Gen 2 to match the same SPL and overall volume level of the Gen 1 with no lights on. That is why I have sold most of my Gen 2 gear.
Tim
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Feb 7, 2017 0:11:09 GMT -5
Go for the monoblocs Someone please explain to me how an amp sounds faster One subjective measure of a stereo is what is called PRaT. That is Pace Rhythm and Timing. I'm not overly sensitive to this phenom, but have heard it in live music where something was simply 'off'. I listened more and finally resolved that they were subtly Off in rhythm. In tune? yes. Decent vocals? sure. Just no 'toe tapping' possible. On a couple tunes, they sounded 'Slow', too. I just couldn't get InTo it. Years ago, I heard Otis Day and the Knights. Now THAT was a show to remember. Driving rhythm. terrific involvement. And my goofy brother in law would't take even 50$ (I had it in my hand!) to yell 'Otis, my Man!' when they came out. What a stiff. I heard a Pair of XPA-100 driving a 7000$ pair of speakers. NoBody beefed or complained even a little. Driven within their limits and with a moderate load, I'm sure they will provide huge satisfaction and value.
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Feb 7, 2017 12:00:04 GMT -5
Go for the monoblocs Someone please explain to me how an amp sounds faster One subjective measure of a stereo is what is called PRaT. That is Pace Rhythm and Timing. I'm not overly sensitive to this phenom, but have heard it in live music where something was simply 'off'. I listened more and finally resolved that they were subtly Off in rhythm. In tune? yes. Decent vocals? sure. Just no 'toe tapping' possible. On a couple tunes, they sounded 'Slow', too. I just couldn't get InTo it. Years ago, I heard Otis Day and the Knights. Now THAT was a show to remember. Driving rhythm. terrific involvement. And my goofy brother in law would't take even 50$ (I had it in my hand!) to yell 'Otis, my Man!' when they came out. What a stiff. I heard a Pair of XPA-100 driving a 7000$ pair of speakers. NoBody beefed or complained even a little. Driven within their limits and with a moderate load, I'm sure they will provide huge satisfaction and value. I keep hearing this PRaT thing but I never understood it. It sounds like all the same thing to me. And it was too vague to make sense to me even in the emotional sense. I could maybe go with immersive - the sound comes out and surrounds you and keeps your attention- it doesn't feel flat. You can't easily ignore the sound because it's everywhere or up front and personal. Timing, I guess I would talk about stuff like microdynamics maybe?
|
|
|
Post by pknaz on Feb 7, 2017 12:43:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on Feb 7, 2017 13:00:10 GMT -5
I have owned plenty of Emotiva amps and I have never noticed much of a difference between any of them. I have owned the UPA-1, UPA-2, UPA-200, XPA-1 Gen 1, XPA-1 Gen 2, XPA-2 Gen 1, XPA-2 Gen 2. Of course the higher powered amps have more headroom but if you are only listening at moderate levels you won't notice any difference. Biggest difference I found was going from Gen 1 to Gen 2. I like the higher gain structure (32db) of the Gen 1 amps over the (29db) gain of the Gen 2. I also found no difference at all between the supposed Class A and Class A/B of the XPA-1's as far as sound, a little hotter under Class A conditions. For my Gen 1 vs Gen 2 the main difference was that I had to get about three LED meter lights coming on while using the Gen 2 to match the same SPL and overall volume level of the Gen 1 with no lights on. That is why I have sold most of my Gen 2 gear. Tim Tim - you just don't have 'garbulkied' ears! It is no wonder you can't hear it. Garbulky has super ears - alas - the rest of us have regular ears.
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Feb 7, 2017 13:03:07 GMT -5
Speed is not about who gets to the finish line first per se. This all starts way back in the early 80s as the big spec of day. Slew rate. Also Transient response. The rise time, and all that kind of stuff. It is not about what Amplifier is going to finish the song first. So when someone talks about how fast an amplifier is, if he/she really understands what they are talking about, mean usually rise time and transient response. So don't quite enroll your Amplifier quite yet in the race at the Nurburgring.
|
|