|
|
Post by orangeLollies on Apr 20, 2010 6:29:29 GMT -5
OMG, a thread created under processor/preamps that aint about a UMC-1  ...I felt the XDA-1 with it's preamp'ishness fits in this catagory. I realise this is possibly a bit premature, as the XDA hasnt been released yet, and we have no exact specs on it, as far as I'm aware... But I'll throw throw this up anyways...cos it's fun to have these discussions and draw schematics, which I've added to make things clearer to understand... I'm a visual guy... ;D Here goes... As the XDA has a digital attenuator (volume control) it can be fed directly into a power amp--> front L/R speakers for the cleanest and most dierct audio path. Problem for me (and I'd guess many others) with this setup is, how do our AVRs hook into the same amp(s) feeding the front speakers?.... Option 1. The XDA needs an analogue HT-bypass input, like the USP-1 has...  Option 2. Otherwise, we are going to have to feed the XDA output through our AVRs (requires bypassing the XDA volume attenuation), which is just adding another, rather chunky circuit into the mix, we loose the advantages of the XDA's "Dual Differential Input Stage" (DDIS) for two-channel listening, which is a shame.  Option 3. Of course some might say, add a USP-1 and send the XDA and AVR-L&R channels through that, as it'll be better than sending your XDA via the AVR.... But that's a whole other piece of gear to falk out $$$ for...and again, adds more circuitry to the audio path, and you loose the DDIS advantage.  For me, Option 1 is the most preferable...Anyone else got any thoughts on this, or should we just be boring and wait 'n' see what the 'actual' specs will be...?  I also have another question regarding the USB input, but will put that in another thread ...tomorrow ...it's past my bedtime...  cheers Shane |
|
Erwin.BE
Emo VIPs 
It's the room, stupid!
Posts: 2,269
|
Post by Erwin.BE on Apr 20, 2010 7:34:07 GMT -5
The XDA-1 is finished and is being prepared for production, so you can forget the HT bypass for it. And it's up to you to choose between option 2 and 3 depending on your bias and the quality of the AVR. 3 is best and you don't have to turn on the AVR for CD. And you can add a turntable. Downside is that when you hook up CD + Sonos + PC etc, you have to change the input on the XDA-1, while you have to change the volume on the XSP/USP-1  I have advocated my preference for a 2 channel audio only DAC-PRE that would combine the XDA-1 and the USP/XSP-1 here before, but it does not seem to happen very soon. A built-in DAB/network tuner would be great too. Hey, it's a new decade, we gotta move on!  |
|
|
|
Post by orangeLollies on Apr 21, 2010 5:46:07 GMT -5
Hey Erwinbel, thanks for your input. The XDA-1 is finished and is being prepared for production, so you can forget the HT bypass for it. Hmmmff, I thought as much... I thought if I pretended it wasnt 'set in stone', then it just might miraculously happen... My Marantz has a pretty good pre-amp, from what I can tell... My ears, and tested it against my mates 10 year old Linn analogue pre (dont know the model), and it came out on top... my mate was a bit p155ed about that... ,So, using my Marantz aint a major thorn, but still a shame to loose the DDIS advantages and introduce more circuits to the audio path... Yeah, I'm left thinking Option 3 with an XSP-1 would be the best bet, as it is said to support full range HT bypass and use the same DDIS architecture as the XDA has... atleast that was the info I got listening to Dan talk about it in the last 'emocast'. This whole 'Dual Differntial' architecture, sounds like the way to go, especially as I will be using 2 UPA-1 monoblocks for power... ;D |
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Apr 21, 2010 6:27:59 GMT -5
I had a TAD TADAC which is tube based DAC and preamp with HT Bypass. It was a great sounding DAC and preamp if tubes are your thing. I used it in my HT system ultilizing the HT Bypass feature and it worked quite well. It would be a great feature if it was included in the XDA-1 but do not see it happening. First because Emotiva is trying to keep it simple to keep costs down on what looks to be a very good DAC. The other reason I see is it could take sales away from the USP-1.
Bill
|
|
|
|
Post by sbavnut on Apr 21, 2010 13:18:54 GMT -5
Did we get an answer from EMO regarding the use of the "digital" volume control in the XDA-1?
|
|
|
|
Post by ossif on Apr 22, 2010 1:30:12 GMT -5
Did we get an answer from EMO regarding the use of the "digital" volume control in the XDA-1? I would very much like to see the HT bypass feature integrated in the XDA-1. |
|
Erwin.BE
Emo VIPs
It's the room, stupid!
Posts: 2,269
|
Post by Erwin.BE on Apr 22, 2010 4:25:55 GMT -5
Did we get an answer from EMO regarding the use of the "digital" volume control in the XDA-1? I would very much like to see the HT bypass feature integrated in the XDA-1. And I would like Derrick back on TV. With new series. Isn't happening. |
|
|
|
Post by orangeLollies on Apr 22, 2010 16:07:26 GMT -5
...Just had another thought.... Would the XDA-1 accept multi-channel LPCM stream, just take the front L&R, and throw away the rest??? ...If so, I could use both digital outs (coax & optical) on the DVD player. One would go to the AVR for center,sub & surrounds, the other would go to the XDA-1 for front L&R .... It's a 'hack', but hey, if it gets the desired results, then why not!? ;D ...Hmmm.... edit: actually that would suck, cos I'd have two volume control to deal with at the same time... DOH! |
|
|
|
Post by jlafrenz on Apr 22, 2010 20:41:56 GMT -5
When is everyone going to realize that this is a DAC and is designed to do a specific job. It is not a pre/pro, nor was it designed to be so. If you want a unit that does all the stuff that people want, then buy a pre/pro because that is what you are describing. The more crap put into a unit like this the more it takes away from what it was truly designed to do. I realize that everyone want to work the unit into their existing HT system, but the design of a unit should not continually have things added to it or be compromised for such a reason. Especially when trying to hit a particular price point. The point of separates is for each component to do separate job. Integrating takes away that principal.
Buy a passive pre amp and solve all your problems.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 22, 2010 20:55:56 GMT -5
When is everyone going to realize that this is a DAC and is designed to do a specific job. It is not a pre/pro, nor was it designed to be so. If you want a unit that does all the stuff that people want, then buy a pre/pro because that is what you are describing. The more crap put into a unit like this the more it takes away from what it was truly designed to do. I realize that everyone want to work the unit into their existing HT system, but the design of a unit should not continually have things added to it or be compromised for such a reason. Especially when trying to hit a particular price point. The point of separates is for each component to do separate job. Integrating takes away that principal. Buy a passive pre amp and solve all your problems. Man, before you slam everyone in the forum for having such stupid ideas, you might consider the catalyst for them. It was Lonnie who said that the XDA-1 has far superior sound when used w/o a preamp. So, with volume attenuation integrated, and several digital inputs, it makes perfect sense to use it as a dedicated, digital pre. Now, wishing for HT bypass might be icing on a cake that might not have been intentionally baked, but it isn't a crazy idea. I agree, it's not going to happen, and there's a price point to be hit here, but why does discussing the idea have to be met with such negativity? For that matter, why are there so many individuals on this board that approach so many discussions with such negativity? |
|
|
|
Post by jlafrenz on Apr 22, 2010 21:55:23 GMT -5
When is everyone going to realize that this is a DAC and is designed to do a specific job. It is not a pre/pro, nor was it designed to be so. If you want a unit that does all the stuff that people want, then buy a pre/pro because that is what you are describing. The more crap put into a unit like this the more it takes away from what it was truly designed to do. I realize that everyone want to work the unit into their existing HT system, but the design of a unit should not continually have things added to it or be compromised for such a reason. Especially when trying to hit a particular price point. The point of separates is for each component to do separate job. Integrating takes away that principal. Buy a passive pre amp and solve all your problems. Man, before you slam everyone in the forum for having such stupid ideas, you might consider the catalyst for them. It was Lonnie who said that the XDA-1 has far superior sound when used w/o a preamp. So, with volume attenuation integrated, and several digital inputs, it makes perfect sense to use it as a dedicated, digital pre. Now, wishing for HT bypass might be icing on a cake that might not have been intentionally baked, but it isn't a crazy idea. I agree, it's not going to happen, and there's a price point to be hit here, but why does discussing the idea have to be met with such negativity? For that matter, why are there so many individuals on this board that approach so many discussions with such negativity? I am not trying to be negative and am merely stating my opinion. It just doesn't make sense to me that everyone wants separate components for different aspects of their system, but then want that component to have all the features on another product or similar product. It defeats the purpose in my eyes. As well, I didn't blatantly say the idea was stupid, I simply stated that there are already products on the market that do what they want to do. I do realize the reasoning behind all of this and is why I pointed out some of the things that I did and made suggestions on how to integrate this into the system without adding a component that my introduce distortion or have a negative impact on the end result. |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 22, 2010 22:03:39 GMT -5
Man, before you slam everyone in the forum for having such stupid ideas, you might consider the catalyst for them. It was Lonnie who said that the XDA-1 has far superior sound when used w/o a preamp. So, with volume attenuation integrated, and several digital inputs, it makes perfect sense to use it as a dedicated, digital pre. Now, wishing for HT bypass might be icing on a cake that might not have been intentionally baked, but it isn't a crazy idea. I agree, it's not going to happen, and there's a price point to be hit here, but why does discussing the idea have to be met with such negativity? For that matter, why are there so many individuals on this board that approach so many discussions with such negativity? I am not trying to be negative and am merely stating my opinion. It just doesn't make sense to me that everyone wants separate components for different aspects of their system, but then want that component to have all the features on another product or similar product. It defeats the purpose in my eyes. As well, I didn't blatantly say the idea was stupid, I simply stated that there are already products on the market that do what they want to do. I do realize the reasoning behind all of this and is why I pointed out some of the things that I did and made suggestions on how to integrate this into the system without adding a component that my introduce distortion or have a negative impact on the end result. Good point, and fair enough. I guess I just misinterpreted or got the wrong vibe from the wording. You do often offer lots of advice, suggestions, so I probably should have assumed differently. I think if the XSP-1 already existed and had incredible sonic performance it would sure be a lot easier to say, hey, just add an XSP-1 if you want that level of performance and features. So, your suggestion of looking elsewhere is a good idea, as well. Hopefully, some day, it will all exist at once, and we can get a killer, all-Emotiva package for HT and 2-channel. |
|
|
|
Post by orangeLollies on Apr 26, 2010 5:22:13 GMT -5
I am not trying to be negative and am merely stating my opinion. It just doesn't make sense to me that everyone wants separate components for different aspects of their system, but then want that component to have all the features on another product or similar product. It defeats the purpose in my eyes. As well, I didn't blatantly say the idea was stupid, I simply stated that there are already products on the market that do what they want to do. I do realize the reasoning behind all of this and is why I pointed out some of the things that I did and made suggestions on how to integrate this into the system without adding a component that my introduce distortion or have a negative impact on the end result. Good point, and fair enough. I guess I just misinterpreted or got the wrong vibe from the wording. You do often offer lots of advice, suggestions, so I probably should have assumed differently. I think if the XSP-1 already existed and had incredible sonic performance it would sure be a lot easier to say, hey, just add an XSP-1 if you want that level of performance and features. So, your suggestion of looking elsewhere is a good idea, as well. Hopefully, some day, it will all exist at once, and we can get a killer, all-Emotiva package for HT and 2-channel. Righto, where to start? ... Firstly jlafrenz, I hear exactly where you are coming from, and I actually agree with you when taking this thread from a certain point of view. WIll get to that shortly. And thanks for responding to Bill and keeping things amicable. It is easy to throw up the wrong vibe somethimes, joys of one-way communication I guess Bill, thank you for stepping in and keeping things in perspective. Glad you got the context of this thread, always great to receive your input. So I'll try to clear things up. Indeed my XDA1-bypass query was triggered by Lonnies 'pre-amp' comments, and that it could be used on it's own without an additional pre-amp. But it is now clear that this 'pre-amp' feature is purley designed for 2-channel use ONLY. period. This is what makes jlafrenz's comment regarding the purpose of seperates a very valid point. My thoughts on using the pre-amp feature of the XDA-1 as part of a more complex setup is obviosly taking the XDA-1 beyond it's intended purpose. It's a DAC afterall... you add one to your system to further refine/specialise a major element (being the DAC) within the audio path. After much thought, it dawned on me... Whether subliminal or direct, perhaps the 'pre-amp' feature of the XDA-1 has been a little over-hyped? and although the pre-amp feature does make for a very capable pre-amp, it is not THE ultimate solution to 2-channel audio. Adding a U/XSP-1 for analogue pre-amp duties should further improve the system correct? After all, in accordance with the 'separates' argument, the U/XSP-1 should provide an even more superior pre-amp, as that it's specialty right?... just as Digital-Analogue-Conversion is the specialty of the XDA-1. Therefore the addition of a U/XSP-1 should not 'degrade', but improve the overall audio path. I realise, I'm probably stating the obvious, but I do believe that this approach or way of thinking clears up most question many will have regarding the use of the XDA-1 as a pre-amp. Hey, If I'm completely wrong regarding the assumption that a separate pre-amp (U/XSP-1) will do a better job than the XDA-1's pre-amp, then please sing out. That's what this is all about, good healthy discussion and ideas, and I'm wrapped that the likes of BillBauman and jlafreanz are getting involved as it is clear these guys offer valuable feedback for the forum. I'm relatively new to the world of real audio gear and I'm absorbing truck loads of knowledge every day (Brain candy), that's my nature. Although I'm a newb, I'm not afraid to post questions if it helps find answers. I will do my best to offer my own knowledge when I feel it's relevant, and I'll throw up ideas like this and receive constructive debate. Sometimes it not the direct answers that help, but the exchange of different advise and perspectives such ideas generate... Brain candy for ear candy ;D and pssst ...I'm ordering my very first Emo gear tomorrow...two UPA-1s ...and so it begins  Shane |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2010 5:26:45 GMT -5
and pssst ...I'm ordering my very first Emo gear tomorrow...two USP-1s ...and so it begins Shane dude, its over . . and the madness begins. . . ;D |
|
|
|
Post by orangeLollies on Apr 26, 2010 5:34:26 GMT -5
BTW, for those that made it through my post above... well done. Also I realise there may be some healthy discussion to be had regarding the XDA-1 'dual differential' architecture, and weather or not a USP-1 would be an upgrade or downgrade for 2 channel only systems, as the USP-1 will effectivly remove much of the 'dual diff' advantage, as opposed to using the XDA-1 preamp or an XSP-1, which is said (somwhere, cant remember) to support the dual-diff thingy.
I wish they'd hurry up with the XSP-1, so I can stop speculating and start planning ;D
cheers
Shane
|
|
|
|
Post by wizardofoz on Apr 26, 2010 8:51:30 GMT -5
Nice to see a fellow K1W1 on here...I left in 1982 but used to find the audio situation way back then pretty good... Pereaux and Rait were to that I liked... not sure what happened to Rait...
Anyway I am sure you will be enjoying your fist Emo gear... as you can see I have a bit of an Emo-addiction too.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 26, 2010 9:20:20 GMT -5
After much thought, it dawned on me... Whether subliminal or direct, perhaps the 'pre-amp' feature of the XDA-1 has been a little over-hyped? and although the pre-amp feature does make for a very capable pre-amp, it is not THE ultimate solution to 2-channel audio. Adding a U/XSP-1 for analogue pre-amp duties should further improve the system correct? After all, in accordance with the 'separates' argument, the U/XSP-1 should provide an even more superior pre-amp, as that it's specialty right?... just as Digital-Analogue-Conversion is the specialty of the XDA-1. Therefore the addition of a U/XSP-1 should not 'degrade', but improve the overall audio path. Shane Shane, I think this is where you get a little off track. The fewer things in the signal path, the better. Unless you're dealing with an already bad signal, and you put in something to try to make it better (like an upsampler or something of the sort to improve a poor quality digital 'something'), all you are doing is running the risk of degrading your signal. In the analog realm, you want as few things 'in the way' as possible. The USP-1 is not going to improve the XDA-1, or Lonnie certainly wouldn't have said he likes it better without it - the guys is trying to sell us all this stuff, after all. The XSP-1 is our 'best hope' as it might have the ability to deliver the signal without degrading its performance, if it's extremely well implemented. Until I have heard an XDA-1, I cannot comment on its volume attenuation abilities, but if Lonnie said it sounds better than with a USP-1, then I have to believe him. Since I doubt he was listening at full amplifier volume (as in 100%), I have to assume that he was using the XDA-1's attenuation abilities when he made his comments, so I have to assume the "volume control" on the XDA-1 is fully up to par. If it's not, we'll all find out when the product finally starts shipping. |
|
|
|
Post by orangeLollies on Apr 26, 2010 15:53:21 GMT -5
Nice to see a fellow K1W1 on here...I left in 1982 but used to find the audio situation way back then pretty good... Pereaux and Rait were to that I liked... not sure what happened to Rait... Anyway I am sure you will be enjoying your fist Emo gear... as you can see I have a bit of an Emo-addiction too. Hey wizrdofoz, cool to hear from you. Yeah we do seem to have some pretty nice gear comin from our wee country, Plinius, Pereaux, Theophany... Would love to support NZ made, but they kinda loose out when it comes to price point, along with all the rest around the world. Excpet the Theophany speakers, they are amazingly awesome value for performance. I have had my heart on a pair of M5's for ages. Soon as funds allow, they're mine ;D |
|
|
|
Post by orangeLollies on Apr 26, 2010 16:05:10 GMT -5
After much thought, it dawned on me... Whether subliminal or direct, perhaps the 'pre-amp' feature of the XDA-1 has been a little over-hyped? and although the pre-amp feature does make for a very capable pre-amp, it is not THE ultimate solution to 2-channel audio. Adding a U/XSP-1 for analogue pre-amp duties should further improve the system correct? After all, in accordance with the 'separates' argument, the U/XSP-1 should provide an even more superior pre-amp, as that it's specialty right?... just as Digital-Analogue-Conversion is the specialty of the XDA-1. Therefore the addition of a U/XSP-1 should not 'degrade', but improve the overall audio path. Shane Shane, I think this is where you get a little off track. The fewer things in the signal path, the better. Unless you're dealing with an already bad signal, and you put in something to try to make it better (like an upsampler or something of the sort to improve a poor quality digital 'something'), all you are doing is running the risk of degrading your signal. In the analog realm, you want as few things 'in the way' as possible. The USP-1 is not going to improve the XDA-1, or Lonnie certainly wouldn't have said he likes it better without it - the guys is trying to sell us all this stuff, after all. The XSP-1 is our 'best hope' as it might have the ability to deliver the signal without degrading its performance, if it's extremely well implemented. Yep agreed, and that was why I thought it a 'shame' (in first post) we couldn't use the XDA-1 all on it's own when wired in to an HT system. Less is better in the case at point. The 'separates' comment made me think I was missing something in regards to their implementation. So we're back where we started... Guess I just need to accept that, for those of us with an HT system in the mix, we need to make a compromise ...Or re-wire the system when switching between HT and 2-channel... The wife would love that ;D This has bought to light a fact that I may have put out of context. The XDA-1 has a 'volume attenuator'... therefore is it wrong of me to call it a pre-amp, or compare it as such? ...My understanding is that this 'volume attenuator' is a far more simple animal, which is preferable when talking analogue audio? cheers Shane |
|
|
|
Post by jlafrenz on Apr 27, 2010 18:39:05 GMT -5
After much thought, it dawned on me... Whether subliminal or direct, perhaps the 'pre-amp' feature of the XDA-1 has been a little over-hyped? and although the pre-amp feature does make for a very capable pre-amp, it is not THE ultimate solution to 2-channel audio. Adding a U/XSP-1 for analogue pre-amp duties should further improve the system correct? After all, in accordance with the 'separates' argument, the U/XSP-1 should provide an even more superior pre-amp, as that it's specialty right?... just as Digital-Analogue-Conversion is the specialty of the XDA-1. Therefore the addition of a U/XSP-1 should not 'degrade', but improve the overall audio path. Shane Shane, I think this is where you get a little off track. The fewer things in the signal path, the better. Unless you're dealing with an already bad signal, and you put in something to try to make it better (like an upsampler or something of the sort to improve a poor quality digital 'something'), all you are doing is running the risk of degrading your signal. In the analog realm, you want as few things 'in the way' as possible. The USP-1 is not going to improve the XDA-1, or Lonnie certainly wouldn't have said he likes it better without it - the guys is trying to sell us all this stuff, after all. The XSP-1 is our 'best hope' as it might have the ability to deliver the signal without degrading its performance, if it's extremely well implemented. Until I have heard an XDA-1, I cannot comment on its volume attenuation abilities, but if Lonnie said it sounds better than with a USP-1, then I have to believe him. Since I doubt he was listening at full amplifier volume (as in 100%), I have to assume that he was using the XDA-1's attenuation abilities when he made his comments, so I have to assume the "volume control" on the XDA-1 is fully up to par. If it's not, we'll all find out when the product finally starts shipping. Bill, you have touched on something worthy of discussion here. Each time you add a component to the signal path there is either loss or distortion. As well, each time amplification or gain is made to the signal, there is added distortion. So adding a preamp with the DAC should still add some distortion to the signal. I am sure it is the intention of the XSP to add as little as possible. I am curious as to how else this may be implemented into a preamp. Even if there is some sort of a hard bypass (as in what is supposed to be in the XMC-1), I would assume that gain would still be applied to the signal. It would just allow for better integration of systems, but still have some compromises. |
|
...I felt the XDA-1 with it's preamp'ishness fits in this catagory.
