XSP-1

[jl]

One final question if I may please Doc? I will be running 2 subs, is the below the right idea?

Run a single cable from both the left and right output of the XSP to the "LFE in" on each separate Sub, but flick the switch on the sub to variable to manage crossover on each of the SUB's.

I think what throws me is the left/right in on the sub. But I think my method above sounds right yeah?

Thanks for your input, much appreciated.

[klinemj]

Apr 17, 2019 19:25:57 GMT -5 jl said:

One final question if I may please Doc? I will be running 2 subs, is the below the right idea?

Run a single cable from both the left and right output of the XSP to the "LFE in" on each separate Sub, but flick the switch on the sub to variable to manage crossover on each of the SUB's.

I think what throws me is the left/right in on the sub. But I think my method above sounds right yeah?

Thanks for your input, much appreciated.

View Attachment

Check your sub's manual to be sure, but I think you have it right. If you flip that switch to "LFE" I think it is bypassing your sub's controls and using whatever comes in. If you switch it to the other position ("variable"), I believe the controls are active.

Mark

[doc1963]

Apr 17, 2019 19:25:57 GMT -5 jl said:

One final question if I may please Doc? I will be running 2 subs, is the below the right idea?

Run a single cable from both the left and right output of the XSP to the "LFE in" on each separate Sub, but flick the switch on the sub to variable to manage crossover on each of the SUB's.

I think what throws me is the left/right in on the sub. But I think my method above sounds right yeah?

Thanks for your input, much appreciated.

View Attachment

Mark is right, consult your subwoofer’s manual, but I do agree that the switch on the subwoofer should be set to “variable”. Setting it to LFE would bypass the internal filters entirely.

[jl]

Perfect thank you both! Yes that's what the manual says as well re variable.

(I think what confused me was the left and right in RCA connectors, and whether I should use both)

"When a signal is connected via left/right inputs
and the crossover switch is set to 'Variable (L&R In), the
subwoofer's internal low pass filter is active."

Cheers JL

[Gary Cook]

Apr 17, 2019 19:25:57 GMT -5 jl said:

One final question if I may please Doc? I will be running 2 subs, is the below the right idea?
Run a single cable from both the left and right output of the XSP to the "LFE in" on each separate Sub, but flick the switch on the sub to variable to manage crossover on each of the SUB's.
I think what throws me is the left/right in on the sub. But I think my method above sounds right yeah?
Thanks for your input, much appreciated.
View Attachment

Personally I’d want the XSP-1 to control the cross over so both subs handle the same frequencies. Otherwise left and right cross overs from the main speakers will be different (no 2 analogue cross overs are exactly the same). So I’d bypass any filtering circuitry in the subs and/or ensure that it has no effect.

Cheers
Gary

[doc1963]

Apr 18, 2019 15:49:15 GMT -5 Gary Cook said:

Apr 17, 2019 19:25:57 GMT -5 jl said:

One final question if I may please Doc? I will be running 2 subs, is the below the right idea?
Run a single cable from both the left and right output of the XSP to the "LFE in" on each separate Sub, but flick the switch on the sub to variable to manage crossover on each of the SUB's.
I think what throws me is the left/right in on the sub. But I think my method above sounds right yeah?
Thanks for your input, much appreciated.
View Attachment

Personally I’d want the XSP-1 to control the cross over so both subs handle the same frequencies. Otherwise left and right cross overs from the main speakers will be different (no 2 analogue cross overs are exactly the same). So I’d bypass any filtering circuitry in the subs and/or ensure that it has no effect.

Cheers
Gary

Very valid point... but keep in mind that engaging bass management on the XSP-1 shunts its ability to deliver fully balanced output. If one is running unbalanced, using the internal BM is fine. But for me, I go the other way and filter at the subwoofer.

[Gary Cook]

Apr 18, 2019 16:20:42 GMT -5 doc1963 said:

Apr 18, 2019 15:49:15 GMT -5 Gary Cook said:

Personally I’d want the XSP-1 to control the cross over so both subs handle the same frequencies. Otherwise left and right cross overs from the main speakers will be different (no 2 analogue cross overs are exactly the same). So I’d bypass any filtering circuitry in the subs and/or ensure that it has no effect.

Very valid point... but keep in mind that engaging bass management on the XSP-1 shunts its ability to deliver fully balanced output. If one is running unbalanced, using the internal BM is fine. But for me, I go the other way and filter at the subwoofer.

Not quite, I run my mains full range, hence fully balanced/discrete. The sub is blended in as the mains roll off.

Cheers
Gary

[leonski]

Apr 17, 2019 20:25:19 GMT -5 jl said:

Perfect thank you both! Yes that's what the manual says as well re variable.

(I think what confused me was the left and right in RCA connectors, and whether I should use both)

"When a signal is connected via left/right inputs
and the crossover switch is set to 'Variable (L&R In), the
subwoofer's internal low pass filter is active."

Cheers JL

Signal below maybe 80hz is mixed to mono anyway.   At least in the Vast Majority of cases.

If you have stereo sub outputs from the preamp, just plug 'em into the sub.    Mine specifies using the L input for a single cable input......

[fmquadri]

XSP, XMC, SA-250, XDA's...

Happy new years all - i've been a long time reader/observer but this is one of my first (if not the first) post!

I've been feeling the itch recently for better quality 2 ch stereo -I get listener fatigue quickly/easily these days and can't listen to music for more than 45 mins at time. 

Over the years i've gone back and forth between 2ch and 5.1 ch priorities.  I would really like to have my cake and eat it too! Need some advice before I spend unnecessary money (like i already have many times before).

Hoping your collective knowledge can provide some guidance..

I am currently running an

XMC-1 (considering upgrading to XMC-2)

SA-250 driving two Axiom M80 floorstanding (circa 2005)

XDA Three (Gen2) driving an Axiom center channel and 2 rear surrounds.

Cambridge Audio 851d DAC for bluetooth/pc connectivity to stream audio from Tidal (hifi subscription) or "lossless compression" audio files

I have an XSP-1 from a previous setup as well - not currently in use.

My goal is to get a 2 ch stereo setup that is less (and I say this as one who is a relative n00b) harsh and bright - I really enjoy that analog richness and warmth that I hear from time to time on other setups.  But I don't necessarily want to start from scratch.  I'd also like to keep the 5.1 for movies -

Do any of you have any thoughts on if the XSP-1 should be brought back into the mix?  I could use the XMC for 5.1 and  the XSP for 2ch (or 2.1)?  Is that going to make much of a difference? Or Just keep the XMC and let the XSP go?

Would adding a turntable w/ a phono stage for a warmer source be worth a try?  I've heard that a different pre-amp (tube or something) might be worth trying.   I know the SA-250 is supposed to be a great amp so it seems like i should keep that for the front mains. Maybe my best option is to home-trial a different set of front main speakers?

I'd hate to have to sell/swap too much equipment.. I have a medium sized living room/kitchen in an apartment.

Thanks for any tips/advice...

[Gary Cook]

It’s pretty easy to insert the XSP-1 into your existing set up between the XMC-1 and the SA-250. The XSP-1 has HT Bypass, so you just select that when you want to use the XMC-1. For stereo 2.1 music you use the XSP-1, no need to turn on the XMC-1.

That’s a zero cost test to see if it makes any difference. Worth a try.

Happy New Year to All
Gary

[garbulky]

Jan 2, 2020 18:35:48 GMT -5 fmquadri said:

XSP, XMC, SA-250, XDA's...

Happy new years all - i've been a long time reader/observer but this is one of my first (if not the first) post!

I've been feeling the itch recently for better quality 2 ch stereo -I get listener fatigue quickly/easily these days and can't listen to music for more than 45 mins at time. 

Over the years i've gone back and forth between 2ch and 5.1 ch priorities.  I would really like to have my cake and eat it too! Need some advice before I spend unnecessary money (like i already have many times before).

Hoping your collective knowledge can provide some guidance..

I am currently running an

XMC-1 (considering upgrading to XMC-2)

SA-250 driving two Axiom M80 floorstanding (circa 2005)

XDA Three (Gen2) driving an Axiom center channel and 2 rear surrounds.

Cambridge Audio 851d DAC for bluetooth/pc connectivity to stream audio from Tidal (hifi subscription) or "lossless compression" audio files

I have an XSP-1 from a previous setup as well - not currently in use.

My goal is to get a 2 ch stereo setup that is less (and I say this as one who is a relative n00b) harsh and bright - I really enjoy that analog richness and warmth that I hear from time to time on other setups.  But I don't necessarily want to start from scratch.  I'd also like to keep the 5.1 for movies -

Do any of you have any thoughts on if the XSP-1 should be brought back into the mix?  I could use the XMC for 5.1 and  the XSP for 2ch (or 2.1)?  Is that going to make much of a difference? Or Just keep the XMC and let the XSP go?

Would adding a turntable w/ a phono stage for a warmer source be worth a try?  I've heard that a different pre-amp (tube or something) might be worth trying.   I know the SA-250 is supposed to be a great amp so it seems like i should keep that for the front mains. Maybe my best option is to home-trial a different set of front main speakers?

I'd hate to have to sell/swap too much equipment.. I have a medium sized living room/kitchen in an apartment.

Thanks for any tips/advice...

Hi there. I have owned Axiom M80's (V3) for about a decade now and I have tried it in different environments. I personally think that with your current setup the XMC-1 direct to the SA-250 would give you a more transparent sound. However with the XSP-1 in the mix it does slightly roll off the upper treble at the expense of some treble and bass detail, so maybe try that.

But....personally here's what I'm thinking...
Is your living room reasonably large? What kind of subwoofers do you have?
In my small living room, adding Emotiva XPA-1 gen 2's made the m80's come to life. However you already have a VERY capable amp the SA-250 so that shouldnt be the issue.

In a larger living room, I noticed the M80's were slightly "shouty" and "strained" sounding in the treble. I.e. harsh.
The solution was surprisingly simple.
1. DUAL subwoofers. This filled in that gap and pretty much took care of the shouty strained sound. It was more that the M80's were begging for good dual subwoofers to complement them in large rooms and fill out the rest of the frequency spectrum. The ones that worked REALLY well was Powersound Audio's V1512's were stunning with it. Provided a nice full sound and took away the shoutiness in the larger living room. You could also try Emotiva's 15" or 12"v ersions. Just make sure it's TWO subwoofers.

2. The other solution for my small room was huge amounts of room treatment. The m80's loved room treatment and it really bought out all the great treble detail that it could do.
It went from muddy harsh to crystal clear and non fatiguing.

3. Speaker positioning. Oh god, these speakers are a Pain in the rear to get positioned properly. Do it wrong and the treble gets a bit wonky. They like to be spaced a little widely apart. So if they are closer to each other than a 80 inches of each other then you are doing it wrong. They care about how far away from the walls they are. Shove them too close to the walls the sound gets muddy. Put them too far apart, the bass reduces significantly.
They also care a lot about toe in. Toe in too much and the soundstage becomes too sharp. They require toe in but only a little bit. Experiment a lot here - with distance to each other, distance from the rear wall, distance to you and toe in and you'll notice some surprising changes.
Also pull them in FRONT of the equipment - it doesn't have to be a lot but they shouldn't be behind the plane of the tv.

4. Finally - it could be your DIRAC room correction causing the harsh sound. DO ALL OF THIS WITHOUT ROOM CORRECTION first and then compare with DIRAC engaged to see what sounds good.

So there ya go. You do these right and imo these are truly one of the best sounding speakers I've ever heard. But they are also very easy to get wrong due to their "eccentricities".

If these things don't do it for you, the Emotiva T2's bring a LOT of what the m80's can do. They are a bit easier to place and are slightly less forward in the treble.

[klinemj]

I had an XSP-1 and an XMC-1, and I personally found the XMC-1 to be as good as a preamp as the XMC-1 was. That said - that was as single variable as it could be...XSP-1 vs. XMC-1 in reference stereo mode.

Are you running the XMC-1 in reference stereo with the Cambridge Audio as the main input for stereo?

Mark

[novisnick]

Jan 3, 2020 21:04:18 GMT -5 klinemj said:

I had an XSP-1 and an XMC-1, and I personally found the XMC-1 to be as good as a preamp as the XMC-1 was. That said - that was as single variable as it could be...XSP-1 vs. XMC-1 in reference stereo mode.

Are you running the XMC-1 in reference stereo with the Cambridge Audio as the main input for stereo?

Mark

What a profound statement, I certainly hope so! 🙄

[novisnick]

I honestly think that the XMC-1 had incorporated the XSP-1 as its base to becoming the XMC-1.
I too have owned all three of them. XSP-1 gen one and two as well as the XMC-1. Furthermore I believe that the XMC-1 is a grand piece of kit, no matter your use.

[Gary Cook]

Jan 3, 2020 21:04:18 GMT -5 klinemj said:

I had an XSP-1 and an XMC-1, and I personally found the XMC-1 to be as good as a preamp as the XMC-1 was. That said - that was as single variable as it could be...XSP-1 vs. XMC-1 in reference stereo mode.
Are you running the XMC-1 in reference stereo with the Cambridge Audio as the main input for stereo?
Mark

My experience is the reverse BUT there are other factors involved. For example with the XSP-1 I use the ERC-3 balanced outputs, which means utilising the ERC-3 dac. Whilst the digital output from ERC-3 to the XMC-1 obviously uses the dac in the XMC-1. I don’t have an XPS-1 so any comparison when using vinyl on TT is tainted by the phono amp differences. As a result, in the only direct comparison (CD’s), the XSP-1 wins out.”, I prefer the sound plus it’s quieter. Which I put down to a number of factors, including the ERC-3 dac and the fully discrete balanced circuitry all the way from the source to the power amps output plus the analogue bass management in XSP-1 (I run the FL and FR full range with only low pass limitations on the sub).

Cheers
Gary.

[klinemj]

Jan 3, 2020 21:04:18 GMT -5 klinemj said:

I had an XSP-1 and an XMC-1, and I personally found the XMC-1 to be as good as a preamp as the XMC-1 XSP-1 was. That said - that was as single variable as it could be...XSP-1 vs. XMC-1 in reference stereo mode.

Are you running the XMC-1 in reference stereo with the Cambridge Audio as the main input for stereo?

EDIT: Thanks novisnick for finding my typo!

Mark

[klinemj]

Jan 3, 2020 23:06:41 GMT -5 Gary Cook said:

Jan 3, 2020 21:04:18 GMT -5 klinemj said:

I had an XSP-1 and an XMC-1, and I personally found the XMC-1 to be as good as a preamp as the XMC-1 was. That said - that was as single variable as it could be...XSP-1 vs. XMC-1 in reference stereo mode.
Are you running the XMC-1 in reference stereo with the Cambridge Audio as the main input for stereo?
Mark

My experience is the reverse BUT there are other factors involved. For example with the XSP-1 I use the ERC-3 balanced outputs, which means utilising the ERC-3 dac. Whilst the digital output from ERC-3 to the XMC-1 obviously uses the dac in the XMC-1. I don’t have an XPS-1 so any comparison when using vinyl on TT is tainted by the phono amp differences. As a result, in the only direct comparison (CD’s), the XSP-1 wins out.”, I prefer the sound plus it’s quieter. Which I put down to a number of factors, including the ERC-3 dac and the fully discrete balanced circuitry all the way from the source to the power amps output plus the analogue bass management in XSP-1 (I run the FL and FR full range with only low pass limitations on the sub).

Cheers
Gary.

Yeah - my comparison was fully single variable...balanced inputs to the XMC-1 vs. balance input to the XMC-1's analogue input (and running reference stereo through the XMC-1), with the same DAC feeding the XMC-1 and the XSP-1. Compared that way, I could not tell a difference. That's when I sold the XSP-1.

Mark

[Gary Cook]

Jan 4, 2020 8:27:32 GMT -5 klinemj said:

Jan 3, 2020 23:06:41 GMT -5 Gary Cook said:

My experience is the reverse BUT there are other factors involved. For example with the XSP-1 I use the ERC-3 balanced outputs, which means utilising the ERC-3 dac. Whilst the digital output from ERC-3 to the XMC-1 obviously uses the dac in the XMC-1. I don’t have an XPS-1 so any comparison when using vinyl on TT is tainted by the phono amp differences. As a result, in the only direct comparison (CD’s), the XSP-1 wins out.”, I prefer the sound plus it’s quieter. Which I put down to a number of factors, including the ERC-3 dac and the fully discrete balanced circuitry all the way from the source to the power amps output plus the analogue bass management in XSP-1 (I run the FL and FR full range with only low pass limitations on the sub).

Yeah - my comparison was fully single variable...balanced inputs to the XMC-1 vs. balance input to the XMC-1's analogue input (and running reference stereo through the XMC-1), with the same DAC feeding the XMC-1 and the XSP-1. Compared that way, I could not tell a difference. That's when I sold the XSP-1
Mark

How did you do the sub woofer integration via the XMC-1 Mark? The problem, actually “difference” is a better description, is that the XMC-1 only does bass management digitally. So when I used the XLR (analogue) inputs I had to have it convert the signal back to digital (ADC) to enable it to do the low pass filtering. Then another digital to analogue conversion (DAC) to supply to the power amps. Hence a CD was going through the DAC in the ERC, then the ADC and another DAC in the XMC-1. I could most definitely notice a sound difference compared to using the XSP-1 which only needs the one conversion, via the DAC in the ERC-3. Plus it was a tiny (very tiny) bit noisier, I assume because it loses the fully discrete balanced pathway (from source to power amp output) when the XMC-1 does the ADC, bass management, DAC processing. If I wanted to use DIRAC then it’s gets in the middle of that as well.

If I ran the FL and FR full range sans sub it would be a one to one comparison, but that’s not how I listen to music. I’ve been running 2.1 stereo for over 30 years so I’m kinda locked into that sound.

Cheers
Gary

[klinemj]

For my initial comparison, I ran without sub. Since then, I have added a sub in reference stereo with some tricky wiring and some help from features on my sub.

I've shared that multiple times here. If you want to see it, I'll dig it up and repost. Hard to find on my phone right now.

Mark

[Gary Cook]

Jan 4, 2020 15:38:16 GMT -5 klinemj said:

For my initial comparison, I ran without sub. Since then, I have added a sub in reference stereo with some tricky wiring and some help from features on my sub.

I've shared that multiple times here. If you want to see it, I'll dig it up and repost. Hard to find on my phone right now.

Mark

It’s cool Mark, I’m on phone too.

Cheers
Gary