|
XSP-1
Oct 5, 2014 6:49:40 GMT -5
Post by rob80b on Oct 5, 2014 6:49:40 GMT -5
Started a separate thread concerning the cross over settings. emotivalounge.proboards.com/thread/39218/xsp-gen-ii-crossover-settings?page=2But for prosperity sake thought I'd post my current results also here. My last few hours adjusting things, stuck with the 8:30 position as the sum of subwoofer and mains is greater than the sum of its parts despite what would have appeared as a downward notch at the crossover point, settling on a negative polarity and 90 degrees phase adjustment for the sub. Sub no EQ Mains Final EQ for the subwoofer in conjunction with mains done with the microphone on a boom at ear level at the listening position. Sub is just about perfect with its integration with the mains, tight and tuneful.
|
|
|
Post by rob80b on Oct 6, 2014 11:21:00 GMT -5
Having gotten the XSP-1 Gen II’s integration into my system ironed out and some quality listening time under my belt I can unanimously declare the XSP-1 a real winner. I’m weary and cynical of the terms “blew away”, “trounced” etc etc but Lonnie and the gang haven’t given us the taste of the high end, the XSP-1 Gen II without a doubt is by far the best pre I’ve had the pleasure of owning or hearing in my 40+ years in this hobby. If your system is up for it.... the improvement in sound quality it brings to table over the USP-1 and other pres cannot be denied, what I initially thought might be a softening of the upper frequencies was in fact the total lack of any harshness and grain, my Dynaudio Special 25s, which are extremely revealing of any downstream anomalies are reproducing the best imaging, detail, depth and naturalness of tone for which they where deigned to reproduce. I was initially skeptical of what the XSP-1 may bring to the table besides being a fully balanced, differential design over the USP-1 but it is in fact much much more and I have to congratulate Lonnie and the team for a job well done. Thanks Guys
|
|
|
XSP-1
Oct 6, 2014 12:19:46 GMT -5
Post by garbulky on Oct 6, 2014 12:19:46 GMT -5
Having gotten the XSP-1 Gen II’s integration into my system ironed out and some quality listening time under my belt I can unanimously declare the XSP-1 a real winner. I’m weary and cynical of the terms “blew away”, “trounced” etc etc but Lonnie and the gang haven’t given us the taste of the high end, the XSP-1 Gen II without a doubt is by far the best pre I’ve had the pleasure of owning or hearing in my 40+ years in this hobby. If your system is up for it.... the improvement in sound quality it brings to table over the USP-1 and other pres cannot be denied, what I initially thought might be a softening of the upper frequencies was in fact the total lack of any harshness and grain, my Dynaudio Special 25s, which are extremely revealing of any downstream anomalies are reproducing the best imaging, detail, depth and naturalness of tone for which they where deigned to reproduce. I was initially skeptical of what the XSP-1 may bring to the table besides being a fully balanced, differential design over the USP-1 but it is in fact much much more and I have to congratulate Lonnie and the team for a job well done. Thanks Guys Hi Rob, I just took a listen to the XSP-1 gen 2 again yesterday. (running of XPA-1 L's fully balanced drool! ) I too wondered about the laid back sound in the treble. Though it hasn't got it 100% perfect in it, I feel it's got pretty close. It's definitely more balanced imo than the USP-1 top to bottom. I found the USP-1 was slightly more "agressive" or forward but mainly in the mid-range giving a bit of a compressed feeling to the sound because the frequency extensions seem a little different somehow. The XSP-1 does have a sound signature but in my opinion it sound s"sophisticated" and what it is is that things just sound more like music to me with it! Glad you're enjoying it!
|
|
|
XSP-1
Oct 6, 2014 12:53:41 GMT -5
Post by rob80b on Oct 6, 2014 12:53:41 GMT -5
Are the results quantifiable, probably yes but the difference today between very good to excellent is small, so that the gab between entry level (not mass produced consumer electronics) and high-end equipment today has been reduced dramatically. In my books the XSP-1 has bypassed what has been previously considered “high-end”, and why I said ” Lonnie and the gang haven’t given us the taste of the high end” they’ve in fact bested it. Again it comes down to the quality of the ancillary equipment to "fully" appreciate what the XSP-1 is capable of but IMHO most stereo systems would benefit from its inclusion.
|
|
|
XSP-1
Oct 6, 2014 14:01:02 GMT -5
Post by garbulky on Oct 6, 2014 14:01:02 GMT -5
I tend to agree
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2014 19:25:25 GMT -5
"Again it comes down to the quality of the ancillary equipment to "fully" appreciate what the XSP-1 is capable of but IMHO most stereo systems would benefit from its inclusion."
====================================================
Rob, can you give an impression of the phono stage?
|
|
|
XSP-1
Oct 7, 2014 9:48:18 GMT -5
Post by rob80b on Oct 7, 2014 9:48:18 GMT -5
"Again it comes down to the quality of the ancillary equipment to "fully" appreciate what the XSP-1 is capable of but IMHO most stereo systems would benefit from its inclusion." ==================================================== Rob, can you give an impression of the phono stage? I will at some point, but for now it would difficult to determine if the XSP-1s phono stage is a step up from the USP-1 or my stand alone Cambridge Azur 651P until I have a better grasp on the XSP-1s overall performance. Suffice to say it does sound very good but am I hearing the improvements in the pre or the phono-stage?…. probably both.
|
|
|
XSP-1
Oct 8, 2014 10:41:21 GMT -5
Post by rob80b on Oct 8, 2014 10:41:21 GMT -5
" Rob, can you give an impression of the phono stage? Well I have been asked…. and thought it was time to pull up my socks and scrutinize the vinyl side of things a bit more. Starting off with Yusef Lateff’s “Morning”, The Savoy Sessions double LP, recorded April 5, 1957 and Apr 9, 1957 but released on Arista in 1976, thing about this recording is that I’ve never really found out if it was originally recorded in stereo, but it’s one of those recordings that on an excellent system,is a you are there experience, with excellent depth and layering. My criteria when evaluating a system is that I’m transported to the venue and not placing the musicians in my room, of course this comes down to the skill of the recording engineers, but there is a distinct difference and the XSP-1 did not disappoint. After two sides I moved on with the David Holland’s “Conference of the Birds” ECM 1973, the album moves from very sparse allowing one to hear into the studio and to fairly energetic where the interplay of the cymbals can get fairly messy and a good indicator with ones rig in resolving the top, again the results were very good. I’ll get into some classical later but did use Shriekback's "Care" and Simple Minds “New Gold Dream” when setting up integration of the sub and the mains and was more than satisfied with the end results, getting a good kick in the chest some tracks. Without a doubt the XSP-1 Gen II continues to be a worthy upgrade from the USP-1 and my former Bryston BP25P, both with CDs and vinyl. I like to listen when I can at fairly hefty volumes and I feel I could max out the volume on the XSP-1 without any discernible distortion, hardness or compression, it’s that clean without ever sounding sterile, at the same time even at much lower volumes the sense of air and detail is not diminished.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
XSP-1
Oct 8, 2014 12:11:22 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2014 12:11:22 GMT -5
Nice review Rob.....keep it up! Your comment regarding the (2K list price) Bryston BP25P speaks volumes. How does low end in particular sound with the phono stage?
|
|
|
XSP-1
Oct 8, 2014 12:28:55 GMT -5
Post by rob80b on Oct 8, 2014 12:28:55 GMT -5
Nice review Rob.....keep it up! How does low end in particular sound with the phono stage? Excellent, believe it's the first time I could really hear a 3 dimensionality and height to the base notes. This could all just be the ""new equipment placebo effect" but I'm quite convinced it's not. Should also mention the headphone is output also a big improvement over the USP-1, and very similar to my Bryton BHA-1 headamp running my Sennheiser HD700's and AKG K712s, although the later are almost maxed out on the dial. Keep in mind, these are my impressions, with my equipment and in my room, but as I mentioned elsewhere I have no doubts the XSP-1 Gen II from what I'm hearing would be a welcome addition to any system.
|
|
|
Post by erniejade on Oct 8, 2014 12:36:22 GMT -5
I never found the unit to be bright. The top end I thought was just right and right in line with my Audio Research SP16. Even though my ar is tube, it is NOT "tuby" sounding. Far from it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
XSP-1
Oct 8, 2014 12:47:20 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2014 12:47:20 GMT -5
I never found the unit to be bright. The top end I thought was just right and right in line with my Audio Research SP16. Even though my ar is tube, it is NOT "tuby" sounding. Far from it. Impressive! Sounds like the XSP-1 is in the league with the big boys with it being favorably compared to names like Bryston, and AR.
|
|
|
XSP-1
Oct 8, 2014 13:53:12 GMT -5
Post by rob80b on Oct 8, 2014 13:53:12 GMT -5
I never found the unit to be bright. The top end I thought was just right ........... Have to agree. To say it’s not bright is definitely an understatement; the XSP-1 is not laid back and not tube like and definitely belies its solid-state existence and I’m sure a lot can be attributed to and I quote “digitally-controlled analog resistor ladder network with 0.5dB per step resolution for volume” as well as the attention given to its circuit design and surface mounted components which reduces as much as possible and more than we have come accustomed to….. any distortion or degradation of the original source input. This obviously accounts for the ability to turn things up much louder and also to listen lower without losing any essence of the recording. In contrast to the USP-1, due to its aggressive volume control (which could be contained with the use of in line attenuators) its overall sound could get overly aggressive, very fast..... but..as I previously mentioned the XSP-1 Gen II on the other hand could possibly get maxed out without any aggression what so ever, so be careful on that dial.
|
|
|
XSP-1
Oct 8, 2014 18:03:04 GMT -5
Post by rtg97229 on Oct 8, 2014 18:03:04 GMT -5
This could all just be the ""new equipment placebo effect" but I'm quite convinced it's not. Placebo or not is sounds like the XSP-1 G2 stands its ground with much more expensive equipment. I find placebo very addictive anyway. I take two to help me sleep at night.
|
|
|
XSP-1
Oct 8, 2014 19:10:11 GMT -5
Post by rob80b on Oct 8, 2014 19:10:11 GMT -5
This could all just be the ""new equipment placebo effect" but I'm quite convinced it's not. Placebo or not is sounds like the XSP-1 G2 stands its ground with much more expensive equipment. I find placebo very addictive anyway. I take two to help me sleep at night. Price "today" is not indicative of quality, I'd prefer to say the XSP_1 Gen II stands up there with the best, and then some.
|
|
|
Post by rtg97229 on Oct 8, 2014 20:12:48 GMT -5
Placebo or not is sounds like the XSP-1 G2 stands its ground with much more expensive equipment. I find placebo very addictive anyway. I take two to help me sleep at night. Price "today" is not indicative of quality, I'd prefer to say the XSP_1 Gen II stands up there with the best, and then some. I have no doubt that is true. I do suspect however that the more one pays for a placebo the more likely it will be to cure a headache. I hope to be getting a XSP-1 Gen II soon (still working on the wife about this strange budget thing she speaks of) and will be more than happy to take my placebos on the side.
|
|
|
XSP-1
Oct 9, 2014 22:04:08 GMT -5
Post by erniejade on Oct 9, 2014 22:04:08 GMT -5
Price "today" is not indicative of quality, I'd prefer to say the XSP_1 Gen II stands up there with the best, and then some. I am going to agree with you on this. My AR sp16 does NOT have a tube sound at all. Its funny the Parasound p5 i have here has more of a tube sound then my tube unit! Actually the newer AR stuff or I should say in the last 15 years isnt over warm. It's more precise or analytic so to speak. Again the emo shares a lot of the same traits. Depending on the tube, the xsp might take it in a blindfold test depending on personal taste. Like the EH tubes, that came with it, the emo would take it. Some BB;'s or telefunken,,,, would come down to personal taste. Still I thought the xsp was a hair smoother vs my ar with the telefunken tubes! I had to resort back to some tunsol tubes from 1959 to take it LOL. As far as the P5 vs the XSP, the best way I can describe this is, 10000% personal taste. If you like the old Fisher tube, CJ tube type warm sound, go P5, if you like a more true to live, precise sound, go with the xsp. It doesn't do anything wrong at all and does a lot right. Sound stage deep adn wide,, its all right on. Not fatiguing, airy high end. it is a great preamp and I like the looks of it as well as the layout and the quality connectors. So it really boils down to what kind of sound do you like.
|
|
|
XSP-1
Oct 25, 2014 0:29:12 GMT -5
Post by leonski on Oct 25, 2014 0:29:12 GMT -5
First, I'm always of the opinion that something is worth what you pay for it. Saying that a piece of gear is 'worth 5x what they are asking for it' is a little, maybe nutty. If it WAS worth more, the manufacturer would ASK more. Assembly of a system for say 3000$ with all components SAID to be 'worth Triple the asking price!' would probably be beaten by a properly assembled 9000$ system.
That being said, I really love my P5. Accurate and well paced, it hits all the 'right notes'. The only downside to ME is the clicky relays. The bass management is fine with 12db / octave slopes. I'm able to lo-cut my MAIN speakers and send a full range signal to the sub and use ITS crossover, which is 24db/oct. The DAC section is perfect for TV audio being fed from the optical of the small dish receiver. Don't forget, that'll be a 32khz sampling frequency. The Balanced 'ins' are perfect for taking the balanced signal from my external, better DAC.
The one major point of the XSP-1 is that it is a true balanced design which will work very well indeed with a fully balanced amplifier.
|
|
todcp
Minor Hero
Posts: 17
|
Post by todcp on Nov 2, 2014 18:24:08 GMT -5
Thanks for the thoughts and comments. I was considering whether to purchase a used USP-1 or the XSP-1. The XSP-1 is on the way. Will be used with my Perreaux 2150b amp, Paradigm Studio 100v4, Emotiva ERC-3 and modded Rega TT. Very excited. I have a friend bringing over his Dared MC7 tube preamp for a comparison of similar priced Chinese built Tube amp vs Chinese built Emotiva Solid State. I will post our thoughts after the comparison.
|
|
|
XSP-1
Nov 2, 2014 19:35:32 GMT -5
Post by novisnick on Nov 2, 2014 19:35:32 GMT -5
I can't say that I have ever heard the XSP-1! I can't say that I've ever heard a P-6 by Rega I realy can't say that I've ever heard any of my gear, except my Studio 100s.the LPs and other input,,,,,yes, but the gear, only the speakers!
And isn't that all were ever really supposed to hear. I think great gear is invisible to the ear! The eye, not so much.
So glad you have a XSP-1 on its way, I think it sounds,,,,,,,,invisible,,,,he,,,,he,,,,,he,,,,,,(great). 8)
|
|