XSP-1

[tapornap113]

Hemster: I referenced the usp-1 because I know alot of people are using it, but I would actually be interested in the XSP-1 with the differential balanced inputs. I have never tried or heard an A/B comparison with stereo played through a pre/pro or reciever vs. through a dedicated stereo preamp. I run the analog outs from my BDP-95 through the 7.1 channel inputs on the umc-1 and run it in direct mode. I think it sounds as good as my "weak link" speakers are capable of. I plan on upgrading them next, but am always thinking ahead, which brought on the question about the preamp. I'm just curious if someone has directly compared the setup we have with the dedicated preamp scenario. And you're right, the Oppo BDP-95 is spectacular sounding!

[tapornap113]

Jan 18, 2012 19:31:47 GMT -5 Topend said:

Jan 18, 2012 19:09:12 GMT -5 tapornap113 said:

I'm sorry to impose on the topic, but I just need to know something. Has anyone gone from a pre/pro or reciever to the USP-1 for 2 channel listening? I'm curious if the sound quality is that much better to justify the cost of the preamp. I am running my BDP-95 analog through my UMC-1 for reference. I am mostly happy with the sound until I can upgrade my speakers, but am curious if I should consider a dedicated preamp for stereo listening. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

I can that SQ is noticeably better with the USP-1 than the UMC-1 for 2 channel music.

Dave.

Dave: How did you compare the two? Analog outs to both, or hdmi to umc-1? How big a difference are we talking, cause the xsp-1 wouldn't exactly be a cheap upgrade. Thanks.

[Topend]

Jan 18, 2012 19:56:07 GMT -5 tapornap113 said:

Jan 18, 2012 19:31:47 GMT -5 Topend said:

I can that SQ is noticeably better with the USP-1 than the UMC-1 for 2 channel music.

Dave.

Dave: How did you compare the two? Analog outs to both, or hdmi to umc-1? How big a difference are we talking, cause the xsp-1 wouldn't exactly be a cheap upgrade. Thanks.

The only legitimate test I have done is playing a CD on my Oppo 93. I had it connected to the UMC-1 via HDMI and the USP-1 via analog.

While the CD was playing I would press the HT bypass button on the USP-1 to hear the UMC-1 and then press the CD button on the USP-1 to hear the USP-1.

I know this was subject to the DACs in the Oppo and UMC-1 but it is the only true test I have done.

Pressing the HT bypass and CD buttons resulted in an immediate switch between the UMC-1 and the USP-1. The volume was matched by ear only.

The SQ difference was obvious.

Mostly my opinion is based on my experience and recollection with these two devices.

I believe sending the same analog signal to either will still show the USP-1 to be the clear winner. Even if the UMC-1 is in direct mode.

Dave.

[wcparks]

I looking at a dedicated 2 channel and the thing I'm interested in is the right and left sub connectors.

[wcparks]

I looking at a dedicated 2 channel and the thing I'm interested in is the right and left sub connectors.

[klinemj]

I've tried multiple ways to compare my USP-1 to a pre-pro for 2-channel. And, I've tried this w/3 variations of pre-pro/AVR: my UMC-1, my Denon 3806 using its own internal amps, and my Denon 3806 using my XPA-2 as external amp. I always have had RCA connectors going from the source to the USP-1, but I have tried HDMI and RCA going from the source to the pre-pro/AVR. For the record, my source was always my Denon 2930ci CD/DVD player.

In all cases, I feel that the USP-1 is far superior in 2-channel mode over any of these pre-pro/AVR options.

I put it down to the USP-1's superior signal/noise ratio + that super-flat frequency response.

And, the difference was big...really big, IMHO.

That's what has me excited about the XSP-1...the fully balanced design should be even better. I know people say XLR's only make a difference on long runs, but each time I hear a system w/XLR from source to amp, I am impressed with the clarity/lack of noise. I am also hoping it's easier to tweak the x-over settings (having the knobs on the back where they are hard to see is a pain on the USP-1...I'd like to be able to more readily play/tweak them and know where they are set). That, plus having the option of running the fronts full range and also have the HT Bypass mode would be nice. Oh, and the toaster...don't forget, Big Dan promised a fully dual-differential digital toaster built-in. Oh, the toast...it will be perfect! (Or, was that w/the XMC-1?)

Mark

[Topend]

Jan 18, 2012 22:06:21 GMT -5 klinemj said:

I've tried multiple ways to compare my USP-1 to a pre-pro for 2-channel. And, I've tried this w/3 variations of pre-pro/AVR: my UMC-1, my Denon 3806 using its own internal amps, and my Denon 3806 using my XPA-2 as external amp. I always have had RCA connectors going from the source to the USP-1, but I have tried HDMI and RCA going from the source to the pre-pro/AVR. For the record, my source was always my Denon 2930ci CD/DVD player.

In all cases, I feel that the USP-1 is far superior in 2-channel mode over any of these pre-pro/AVR options.

I put it down to the USP-1's superior signal/noise ratio + that super-flat frequency response.

And, the difference was big...really big, IMHO.

That's what has me excited about the XSP-1...the fully balanced design should be even better. I know people say XLR's only make a difference on long runs, but each time I hear a system w/XLR from source to amp, I am impressed with the clarity/lack of noise. I am also hoping it's easier to tweak the x-over settings (having the knobs on the back where they are hard to see is a pain on the USP-1...I'd like to be able to more readily play/tweak them and know where they are set). That, plus having the option of running the fronts full range and also have the HT Bypass mode would be nice. Oh, and the toaster...don't forget, Big Dan promised a fully dual-differential digital toaster built-in. Oh, the toast...it will be perfect! (Or, was that w/the XMC-1?)

Mark

Quoted from Wikipedia:

"Fully balanced internal circuitry has been promoted as yielding 3dB better dynamic range."

In layman terms, a piece of music featuring a very quiet single instrument then immediately transitioning to a very loud full orchestra will be better reproduced on a fully balanced system due to the superior dynamic range.

How obvious this is I don't know but essentially we all strive for improved SQ so this is something desirerable to me and others.

Dave.

[roadrunner]

Jan 18, 2012 19:46:38 GMT -5 tapornap113 said:

Hemster: I referenced the usp-1 because I know alot of people are using it, but I would actually be interested in the XSP-1 with the differential balanced inputs. I have never tried or heard an A/B comparison with stereo played through a pre/pro or reciever vs. through a dedicated stereo preamp. I run the analog outs from my BDP-95 through the 7.1 channel inputs on the umc-1 and run it in direct mode. I think it sounds as good as my "weak link" speakers are capable of. I plan on upgrading them next, but am always thinking ahead, which brought on the question about the preamp. I'm just curious if someone has directly compared the setup we have with the dedicated preamp scenario. And you're right, the Oppo BDP-95 is spectacular sounding!

In various threads over the past couple of years, this same question has come up several times. I had performed an A/B comparison using analog outputs from the ERC-1 to both the USP-1 and the UMC-1. I had the USP-1 wired to take advantage of the HT ByPass function, which made it very easy to run the A/B comparison. It wasn't even close... the USP-1 sounded far better than the UMC-1 when listening to the exact same album from the ERC-1. I repeated the A/B with all the possible wiring scenarios between the ERC-1 and the UMC-1. With each scenario the USP-1 was the hands down victor.

For more detail I have linked a response from one of the previous threads that answer this query.

emotivalounge.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=prepro&thread=11894&page=1#185095

[Golden Ear]

We can all wish this XSP-1 will bring close to live performance and gives you the feeling of you are there infront of the singer. I don't mind getting XSP-1 if can bring this close to live performance with all the natural decay and reverberation of the instruments. Will XSP-1 will be revolutionary sound compare to USP-1?

[Topend]

Jan 19, 2012 12:09:50 GMT -5 Golden Ear said:

We can all wish this XSP-1 will bring close to live performance and gives you the feeling of you are there infront of the singer. I don't mind getting XSP-1 if can bring this close to live performance with all the natural decay and reverberation of the instruments. Will XSP-1 will be revolutionary sound compare to USP-1?

Decay and reverberation will be influenced by your room. Do you have a dedicated room with acoustic treatments?

Dave.

[klinemj]

Dave - I love dynamic range...can't go wrong having it, can only go wrong without it. Maybe that's what explains why I have always liked the XLR connected things I have listened to. Whatever the reason - it's worth me trying once it it here!

Mark

[Topend]

Jan 19, 2012 16:44:46 GMT -5 klinemj said:

Dave - I love dynamic range...can't go wrong having it, can only go wrong without it. Maybe that's what explains why I have always liked the XLR connected things I have listened to. Whatever the reason - it's worth me trying once it it here!

Mark

I couldn't agree more Mark. After only owning a USP-1 for a few weeks and hearing how great it is I am now interested in the XSP-1.

Dave.

[tapornap113]

Thanks for the input Mark, Dave, and Roadrunner. Looks like I might have to look into the XSP-1 also. I also want to go the balanced XLR route, as I feel it can only help with the noise floor, and the hotter output signal should give the amplifier a tiny bit more headroom as you say. Now I just have to come up with the funds for all these new fully differential/balanced toys. ;D

[roadster]

January 22nd...where is it?

[rjpoint]

It's still in production??? But it is Chinese New Year today and they're probably busy celebrating rather than packing a Sea Container bound for the USA.

[Golden Ear]

Jan 18, 2012 22:06:21 GMT -5 klinemj said:

I've tried multiple ways to compare my USP-1 to a pre-pro for 2-channel. And, I've tried this w/3 variations of pre-pro/AVR: my UMC-1, my Denon 3806 using its own internal amps, and my Denon 3806 using my XPA-2 as external amp. I always have had RCA connectors going from the source to the USP-1, but I have tried HDMI and RCA going from the source to the pre-pro/AVR. For the record, my source was always my Denon 2930ci CD/DVD player.

In all cases, I feel that the USP-1 is far superior in 2-channel mode over any of these pre-pro/AVR options.

I put it down to the USP-1's superior signal/noise ratio + that super-flat frequency response.

And, the difference was big...really big, IMHO.

That's what has me excited about the XSP-1...the fully balanced design should be even better. I know people say XLR's only make a difference on long runs, but each time I hear a system w/XLR from source to amp, I am impressed with the clarity/lack of noise. I am also hoping it's easier to tweak the x-over settings (having the knobs on the back where they are hard to see is a pain on the USP-1...I'd like to be able to more readily play/tweak them and know where they are set). That, plus having the option of running the fronts full range and also have the HT Bypass mode would be nice. Oh, and the toaster...don't forget, Big Dan promised a fully dual-differential digital toaster built-in. Oh, the toast...it will be perfect! (Or, was that w/the XMC-1?)

Mark

AVR has so many processing and circuit inside and thus reduce signal purity, however with pure direct it will reduce that but will never come close to dedicated stereo pre-amp. Look at the layout of USP-1 to typical AVR, it has less complex and straight as possible.

[esquire]

Seriously, that's a real bummer. I thought this unit was in production with a roll out date expected in February.

[sharkman]

Hmm, funny how it keeps getting pushed further down the road.

[sharkman]

Jan 17, 2012 0:37:01 GMT -5 roadrunner said:

Then you better pony up to get the XSP-1 as it is in production right now. They have had me drooling for a very long time. I just hope they get a load of XSP-1s on a container ship before Chinese New Year starts.

Maybe you should check with your sources again roadrunner, it sounds like this is way off according to vincent.

[Golden Ear]

I am very skeptical how much resolution would it provide in direct mode in comparison with USP-1. We all know XSP-1 has more added features than USP-1 but what really makes me so interested how it sound side by side with USP-1 in pure direct mode.