|
|
Post by nickwin on Jan 24, 2018 12:26:20 GMT -5
Just curious if anyone has had the opportunity to compare any of these amps. I own an SA250 and really like it. The XPA-1L checks all the boxes in terms of technicalities, class A, Mono AND fully balanced, yet I don't see to many people raving about them like they do the SA250s.
Points of interest:
XPA2 and SA250 have 1.2KVA transformer (600 per channel) while the XPA-1L only has 450va. 450va for 500 watt amp is not particularly beefy.
The XPA-1L has 16 output devices the SA250 has only 10 per channel
XPA-1L has lots of capacitance @ 90,000uf given its rated power (or are these wired in parallel making actual system capacitance 45,000uf?)
I talked to two different people at Emotiva, one said the XPA-1L SHOULD sound a little better, the other said SA250 all day.
If anyone has heard both of these please share your thoughts!
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jan 24, 2018 12:42:27 GMT -5
I would stick with your SA250. Others disagree (geebo and maybe gary), but I thought the XPA-2 gen 2 was better than the XPA-1 L. I found the XPA-2 gen 2 to have more bass extension and dynamics than four (yes that's right) XPA-1 L's in a quad bi amped configuration. Also tried the regular 2 as well. The XPA-1 L's sound nice and smooth though. Definitely still a winner as expected. But if I had to pick, XPA-2 gen 2. I assume the SA 250 is even better but have never heard it.
|
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Jan 24, 2018 12:47:33 GMT -5
I would stick with your SA250. Others disagree (geebo and maybe gary), but I thought the XPA-2 gen 2 was better. I found the XPA-2 gen 2 to have more bass extension and dynamics than four (yes that's right) XPA-1 L's in a quad bi amped configuration. Also tried the regular 2 as well. The XPA-1 L's sound nice and smooth though. Definitely still a winner as expected. But if I had to pick, XPA-2 gen 2. I assume the SA 250 is even better but have never heard it. Interesting, the 1L's look so good on paper! That said the lack of bass extension/dynamics might point to the undersized power supply relative to the XPA2 and SA250. I feel like the 1L SHOULD have used a 600va transformer. I actually haven't heard the XPA2, but I have been REALLY enjoying the SA250. I did find that the SA250 has a different overall signature than the other Emotiva amps Ive used, did you find the XPA-1L had more or less the same sound signature as the other XPAs? Thanks for sharing! |
|
|
|
Post by DavidR on Jan 24, 2018 12:51:51 GMT -5
My first Emotiva amp was an XPA-2 G2. It was a very good amp especially for the money. When I saw the SA250 being offered and looked at the difference in circuitry I knew I wanted one. So I bought one and sold the XPA-2. I liked the SA250 so much I bought a second one. Below is my review of the two amps:
(First set-up was driving AR90 speakers using XSP-1 G2 pre; second amp used for Bose 901_II with a modded Carver C-1 pre)
The SA-250 is a Pro amp (Studio Reference), sounds like it and performs like it. It's ultra quiet.
Limited run of 500 units
Limited Edition Studio Reference Power Amplifier
Emotiva's SA-250 amp is from their Pro line and Stealth line-up. There's no doubt it was originally a Sherbourn amp but Emotiva added an inch thick solid aluminum billet for the face plate, provided selectable gain of 23dB or 29dB and a ground lift for each channel. It is an A/B amp but the architecture is very different from their other amps. It is laid out like a dual mono-block but they went with a dual secondary winding in the transformer instead of two separate transformers. This is a sweet amp with the ability to power many difficult to drive speakers.
The SA-250 is a better sounding amp than the XPA-2. No doubt about it. Worth the extra money. It didn't take very long to hear the virtues of the SA-250. The XPA-2 can be a little bright on some music and somewhat forward in the upper mids. The SA-250's treble is more relaxed, extended, and simply a joy to listen to. Cymbals sound fantastic. The detail and clarity is there but not in your face. The SA-250 is also better in the bass. It is more extended, flatter and packs a lot of impact. The midrange is where the SA-250 is a clear winner. It’s not only better than the XPA-2 but also better than most amps I've listened to, including Krell (integrated), Adcom, Rotel, NAD, Parasound, Marantz, and Denon. There is a sense of control and authority in the sound with the SA-250 that must be heard to really grasp what it is capable of doing. The XPA-2 is a fine amp, don’t get me wrong. I had it for over a year and was happy with it. But to answer your question honestly: the SA-250 is better, plain and simple. It's a Pro amp and sounds and performs like one. Just my two cents.
From Emotiva SA-250 Owner's Manual:
The SA-250 was designed to be the flagship amplifier for a new line of super-high-end studio
equipment. Although it inherits its short signal path Class A/B architecture from our audiophile
equipment, the SA-250 incorporates several circuit refinements and additions that raise its
performance to a whole new level. The massively overbuilt power supply allows the SA-250 to
drive any real-world speaker load effortlessly and with aplomb; it’s incredibly low distortion
and amazingly low noise floor ensure that you’ll hear all the music, with nothing added or
subtracted.
|
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Jan 24, 2018 13:03:07 GMT -5
Thanks for the excellent Info! Out of curiosity where did you get the info on the sa250 power supply using independent secondary windings? I hadn’t heard this and this would be the only Emotiva amp I know of with his type of PS. Very interesting!
|
|
|
|
Post by audiophill on Jan 24, 2018 13:04:50 GMT -5
I had a xpa-1l and I still have a sa-250. The sa-250 is much better in my opinion
|
|
|
|
Post by brutiarti on Jan 24, 2018 13:12:19 GMT -5
I had the Xpa-2 and xpa-1L's. I would say it will depend on the speakers. The xpa-1l were nice but i prefer the xpa-2 quickness. The xpr-2 was even better than the xpa-2 as it was more laid back and not as harsh.
|
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Jan 24, 2018 13:24:35 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback!
It kind of begs the question, what did Lonnie and crew do with this thing to make a single ended clas ab stereo amp sound so good relitive to there other offerings.
|
|
|
|
Post by DavidR on Jan 24, 2018 13:28:59 GMT -5
Thanks for the excellent Info! Out of curiosity where did you get the info on the sa250 power supply using independent secondary windings? I hadn’t heard this and this would be the only Emotiva amp I know of with his type of PS. Very interesting! I don't know if it was on the Product page but it's on page 5 of the Owners Manual. The manual pdf is too big to attach. If you don't have it and want it I could email it to you. PM me if you do. |
|
|
|
Post by DavidR on Jan 24, 2018 13:32:53 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback! It kind of begs the question, what did Lonnie and crew do with this thing to make a single ended clas ab stereo amp sound so good relitive to there other offerings. It is a Sherbourn amp.  |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Jan 24, 2018 13:35:44 GMT -5
Thanks for the excellent Info! Out of curiosity where did you get the info on the sa250 power supply using independent secondary windings? I hadn’t heard this and this would be the only Emotiva amp I know of with his type of PS. Very interesting! I don't know if it was on the Product page but it's on page 5 of the Owners Manual. The manual pdf is too big to attach. If you don't have it and want it I could email it to you. PM me if you do. I do have the manual, I must have just missed this. Thanks, that’s good to know! |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Jan 24, 2018 13:40:03 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback! It kind of begs the question, what did Lonnie and crew do with this thing to make a single ended clas ab stereo amp sound so good relitive to there other offerings. It is a Sherbourn amp. View AttachmentAhh that explains the different voicing. I don’t really know the details about Sherbourn other than they where acquired by emotiva, were they originally a completely different company with different employees/engineers? For some reason I thought they where always affiliated. Also, what amp is that in the picture? |
|
|
|
Post by sahmen on Jan 24, 2018 13:41:26 GMT -5
I have the SA-250, the XPA-1ls (Gen 1), and the XPA-2 (Gen 1)... Unfortunately I have not done any head to head (A/B) comparisons between them, although I have listened to each one of them independently in a system for relatively long periods, and have arrived at a determination of preferences based on the relative pleasantness of my listening experiences as I remember them, and so these thoughts should be taken in that light... I have to say, first of all, that none of these amps offers a bad or nasty experience, and that is good already... Still my first choice among them will always remain the SA-250, followed by the XPA-1Ls, and then the XPA-2 (Gen 1)...
Incidentally, I also have a pair of XPA-1 Gen 2s driving the two main front speakers (Polk LSIM 707s) in my 2.1/7.1 main system. The SA-250 had to replace the two XPA-1 Gen2s for about 2 months last year because one of the monoblocks had to go back to Emo for warranty service work... The SA-250 sounded slightly different from the XPA-1 Gen 2 monoblocks in the same chain of components, but I have still not been able to determine conclusively which one of the two options I like better. That would take a relatively tedious process of A/B auditioning, that I feel too lazy to do now. However, the SA-250 was so fulfilling in driving those two fronts that I never really missed the XPA-1 Gen2s when they were absent from the system, and I think I can live with the SA-250 alone in this same role, if I had to, and I wouldn't miss the monoblocks at all (No offense intended to the illuminati of the Secret Monoblock Society here. I just want to give credit where credit is due).
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jan 24, 2018 13:58:24 GMT -5
I would stick with your SA250. Others disagree (geebo and maybe gary), but I thought the XPA-2 gen 2 was better. I found the XPA-2 gen 2 to have more bass extension and dynamics than four (yes that's right) XPA-1 L's in a quad bi amped configuration. Also tried the regular 2 as well. The XPA-1 L's sound nice and smooth though. Definitely still a winner as expected. But if I had to pick, XPA-2 gen 2. I assume the SA 250 is even better but have never heard it. Interesting, the 1L's look so good on paper! That said the lack of bass extension/dynamics might point to the undersized power supply relative to the XPA2 and SA250. I feel like the 1L SHOULD have used a 600va transformer. I actually haven't heard the XPA2, but I have been REALLY enjoying the SA250. I did find that the SA250 has a different overall signature than the other Emotiva amps Ive used, did you find the XPA-1L had more or less the same sound signature as the other XPAs? Thanks for sharing! I think that's the reason - the power supply. But of course I don't know. I felt there was some (mild) compression on the dynamics on the Tekton Pendragon towers. However you wouldn't know it unless you heard an amp that didn't have it. There's no doubt it's still a good amp though. But I was really surprised to see this as I expected both the XPA-1 L pair AND the quad XPA-1 L to outclass the XPA-2. The XPA-2 gen 2 is an XPA-1 repurposed for stereo. The XPA-1 L however is not quite an XPA-1 "cut in half." It's sort of a hybrid. So that may be the issue. But who knows? I can't "hear" a power supply. I can only guess. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jan 24, 2018 14:04:11 GMT -5
I have the SA-250, the XPA-1ls (Gen 1), and the XPA-2 (Gen 1)... Unfortunately I have not done any head to head (A/B) comparisons between them, although I have listened to each one of them independently in a system for relatively long periods, and have arrived at a determination of preferences based on the relative pleasantness of my listening experiences as I remember them, and so these thoughts should be taken in that light... I have to say, first of all, that none of these amps offers a bad or nasty experience, and that is good already... Still my first choice among them will always remain the SA-250, followed by the XPA-1Ls, and then the XPA-2 (Gen 1)... Incidentally, I also have a pair of XPA-1 Gen 2s driving the two main front speakers (Polk LSIM 707s) in my 2.1/7.1 main system. The SA-250 had to replace the two XPA-1 Gen2s for about 2 months last year because one of the monoblocks had to go back to Emo for warranty service work... The SA-250 sounded slightly different from the XPA-1 Gen 2 monoblocks in the same chain of components, but I have still not been able to determine conclusively which one of the two options I like better. That would take a relatively tedious process of A/B auditioning, that I feel too lazy to do now. However, the SA-250 was so fulfilling in driving those two fronts that I never really missed the XPA-1 Gen2s when they were absent from the system, and I think I can live with the SA-250 alone in this same role, if I had to, and I wouldn't miss the monoblocks at all (No offense intended to the illuminati of the Secret Monoblock Society here. I just want to give credit where credit is due). That's very high praise especially considering all the rest of your associated gear. It's impressive the SA-250 can keep up with the XPA-1 gen 2 |
|
|
|
Post by sahmen on Jan 24, 2018 14:06:27 GMT -5
I have the SA-250, the XPA-1ls (Gen 1), and the XPA-2 (Gen 1)... Unfortunately I have not done any head to head (A/B) comparisons between them, although I have listened to each one of them independently in a system for relatively long periods, and have arrived at a determination of preferences based on the relative pleasantness of my listening experiences as I remember them, and so these thoughts should be taken in that light... I have to say, first of all, that none of these amps offers a bad or nasty experience, and that is good already... Still my first choice among them will always remain the SA-250, followed by the XPA-1Ls, and then the XPA-2 (Gen 1)... Incidentally, I also have a pair of XPA-1 Gen 2s driving the two main front speakers (Polk LSIM 707s) in my 2.1/7.1 main system. The SA-250 had to replace the two XPA-1 Gen2s for about 2 months last year because one of the monoblocks had to go back to Emo for warranty service work... The SA-250 sounded slightly different from the XPA-1 Gen 2 monoblocks in the same chain of components, but I have still not been able to determine conclusively which one of the two options I like better. That would take a relatively tedious process of A/B auditioning, that I feel too lazy to do now. However, the SA-250 was so fulfilling in driving those two fronts that I never really missed the XPA-1 Gen2s when they were absent from the system, and I think I can live with the SA-250 alone in this same role, if I had to, and I wouldn't miss the monoblocks at all (No offense intended to the illuminati of the Secret Monoblock Society here. I just want to give credit where credit is due). That's very high praise especially considering all the rest of your associated gear. It's impressive the SA-250 can keep up with the XPA-1 gen 2 Yes, Gar... The SA-250 really surprised me... in a very pleasant way, |
|
|
|
Post by DavidR on Jan 24, 2018 14:11:28 GMT -5
Ahh that explains the different voicing. I don’t really know the details about Sherbourn other than they where acquired by emotiva, were they originally a completely different company with different employees/engineers? For some reason I thought they where always affiliated. Also, what amp is that in the picture? I don't know the specifics of Sherbourn/Emo beyond what you know. I do know they had a number of these Sherbourn amps (pic) and modded them for Studio use and they later decided to make a limited run for the public all with the Emotiva moniker. Both of my speakers are difficult to drive but for different reasons. The SA250 doesn't break a sweat with either. The bass and mids from my acoustic suspension 901's are killer; even the treble is improved greatly. My AR90's are magnificent top to bottom. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jan 24, 2018 14:44:31 GMT -5
Two known differences with the SA-250.
1. It has much lower gain than other emo amps.
2. It has a secondary winding on its tranformer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jan 24, 2018 15:05:00 GMT -5
Of course garbulky is spot on, I'm going to disagree. Maybe it's because I run 2.1 for stereo music, have for decades, but a pair of XPA-1L's are my pick in comparison to an XPA-2. It's not even close, using the XPA-1L's quad differential fully balanced circuitry with long XLR cables but short speaker cables (a monoblock advantage) gives them a totally silent sound stage that the music just appears from. The XPA-2 just doesn't have that, plus the XPA-1L's extend it further with their Class A option. As many will say, the difference between them in Class A versus AB is very subtle and hardly noticeable, but with some instruments, recordings, music it's definitely a benefit. It's not that the XPA-2 is a noisy amp in itself, just that the XPA-1L has the hardware to take advantage of being a monoblock. Absolutely no cross talk of course, plus I can locate each one close by its respective speaker, a stereo amp can't do that.
Even at my loudest (party time) listening volumes there is no way that the power supplies are being remotely stretched, At 92 db my speakers are not terribly inefficient, but whilst the listening area is compact the room itself is huge with cathedral ceilings plus I have applied some discrete acoustic work. There is no way I could sit in the room with the volume high enough to anywhere near extend the power supplies. Of which there are 2, one for each channel, so one channel isn't stealing power from the other.
In my system it's really a no contest, maybe if I didn't use the XPA-1L's circuitry and monoblock advantages it might be closer. But them why buy quad differential mono blocks if you're not going to use them to the best advantage.
Cheers
Gary
|
|
|
|
Post by DavidR on Jan 24, 2018 15:25:18 GMT -5
Two known differences with the SA-250. 1. It has much lower gain than other emo amps. 2. It has a secondary winding on its tranformer. It has selectable gain: 29dB and 23dB <EDIT> (add): It has DUAL secondary windings. Most xmfr's have a primary winding and a single secondary winding. I believe that the SA-250 uses the two 2ndary windings to feed a single side of the amp i.e. one winding for the left side and the other winding for the right side. Whereas in an XPA-2 the single 2ndary winding feeds all the storage capacitors and both sides are fed power from a single source. That's why I say the SA250 is similar to a dual monoblock amp like this RPA-1:  |
|
