Erwin.BE
Emo VIPs 
It's the room, stupid!
Posts: 2,269
|
Post by Erwin.BE on Sept 14, 2012 2:15:18 GMT -5
Gain matching isn't a requirement as long as you can control the source output levels. Audio amplification is linear. Two channel: it's irrelevant if both amps are the same. HT: the gain can be matched in the UMC-1, or any other surround processor with channel level trims. You are correct... up to a degree. My XPA-1 are 32 dB gain and this means I need to attenuate the volume more than amps with 29 dB would force me. Since my volume control is digital from a Weiss DAC2 (with four analogue presets of which the lowest output voltage is chosen) this is not as good as 29dB would have been (digital VC is lossy). The gain can be matched in a pre-pro, yes. But with high efficiency speakers this can result in some of the speakers out of the operating margin. Like when Audyssey XT sets them to -12 dB, which is max. So maybe it's needed to be -15 dB, but it can't do that. But I have no doubt that from now on every new or revised amp from Emotiva will be 29 dB. Both UPA and XPR are 29 dB, only the "old" XPA remain 32 dB, for now. 29 dB is simply better suited for 99% of the purposes. |
|
|
|
Post by kellys on Sept 14, 2012 17:22:45 GMT -5
Yes, but while I agree with you on proper gain structure of an audio system this is off topic right now. The gain level of Emotiva amps has certainly been discussed before. I also have a DAC with digital volume control, whoever since I built my own I was able to select the optimum output level (600 mV full scale).
This comment was meant for people who were worried that a 32 db and 29 db amp could not coexist in a audio system.
|
|
|
|
Post by kellys on Sept 14, 2012 17:36:38 GMT -5
Are the XPA-1Ls designed to surpass the SQ of the XPA-1s? I will be so happy if their SQ equals that of the XPA-1s. That would be a great feat for Lonnie and Emotiva. Surpassing it would be an engineering marvel. I hope they are up to that task.  |
|
|
|
Post by Dark Ranger on Sept 14, 2012 19:44:18 GMT -5
This comment was meant for people who were worried that a 32 db and 29 db amp could not coexist in a audio system. Hi kellys. For clarification, I'm aware that amps with differing gain structures can coexist in an audio system and I'm familiar with the ways of doing so. However, based on my past experience, I now prefer to match gain at the amp level because, for me, it is just simpler and "cleaner" that way. The fewer adjustments I can make with electronics, the better. |
|
|
|
Post by zaphod2012 on Sept 14, 2012 23:02:21 GMT -5
my experience is that all multichannel amps degrade as each input is used. My 5 channel amp sounds best with only 1 channel driven and has the rated power, with all 5 channels driven, and with difficult loads sound quality declines, as does the power output. So 5 channel decent amp vs. 5 mono xpa-1-l's should be no contest. I remember the first time comparing Naim 250's vs 135's, and then isobariks active with 250's vs. 135's, the gap got larger and the sound at that time breathtaking......yep showing my age. I presonally feel a well designed mono amp will always sound superiot to an equivalent stereo amp, even if dual mono. I have played with several.
i cannot wait for the xpa-1-l's, they could be a value bombshell
|
|
|
|
Post by Golden Ear on Sept 18, 2012 11:08:34 GMT -5
Class AB topology is already an excellent amp design coupled with high SNR. All of us here want a music close to a live performance that make us goose bump everytime we listen. Upgrading an amp to more power or different topology such as Class A yield a marginal improvement. The truth is the biggest improvement you will ever make that will make you say WOW would be speaker upgrade and acoustic. No matter how flat the frequency response of an electronics will all be diminish if the response curve of the speaker is sloppy such as peak and dips in given region plus the acoustic influence the response curve of the speaker. You can spend trillion of dollars in gear only gives you marginal improvement till you get the speaker and acoustic done right. I would rather invest heavily on speakers and acoustic to give me the maximum in return rather than gear that will give marginal improvement. I hope this make sense to you guys as we all seek the greatest fidelity a music can give us. 1 is the highest and 5 is the lowest.
1. Speakers/acoustic
2. Source
3. preamp
4. amp
5. cable
|
|
hemster
Global Moderator 
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,950
|
Post by hemster on Sept 18, 2012 11:28:24 GMT -5
Class AB topology is already an excellent amp design coupled with high SNR. All of us here want a music close to a live performance that make us goose bump everytime we listen. Upgrading an amp to more power or different topology such as Class A yield a marginal improvement. The truth is the biggest improvement you will ever make that will make you say WOW would be speaker upgrade and acoustic. No matter how flat the frequency response of an electronics will all be diminish if the response curve of the speaker is sloppy such as peak and dips in given region plus the acoustic influence the response curve of the speaker. You can spend trillion of dollars in gear only gives you marginal improvement till you get the speaker and acoustic done right. I would rather invest heavily on speakers and acoustic to give me the maximum in return rather than gear that will give marginal improvement. I hope this make sense to you guys as we all seek the greatest fidelity a music can give us. 1 is the highest and 5 is the lowest. 1. Speakers/acoustic 2. Source 3. preamp 4. amp 5. cable I agree with the order above. I would add "proper calibration" to the list, somewhere fairly high in the order. I'm amazed at the number of setups I've seen where the gear is top notch but sounds bad as it has not been configured properly. |
|
|
|
Post by Golden Ear on Sept 18, 2012 17:02:09 GMT -5
Video oriented material been advancing from VHS to DVD and now bluray which is HD. Their sound have also advanced since the the day of DTS to DTS master on bluray. All of us audiophile been stuck on old aging vinyl and CD's. SACD and DVD-A never became a mainstream due to the fact the digital download from itunes and mp3 are popular. It seems music is going backward instead forward because of the popularity of itunes and mp3. Sure, they sound good on portable audio and car stereo but what about us who has a great system. High end system can only give you so much until you feed them with higher quality media.
|
|
|
|
Post by preproman on Sept 19, 2012 16:28:38 GMT -5
Sorry for the ridiculous questions. However, there is a reason for the madness.
How many CLASS A watts would this amp put into a 50 ohm load?
What's the ETA on the release date?
Why are the speaker post so far apart?
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 19, 2012 16:33:01 GMT -5
Sorry for the ridiculous questions. However, there is a reason for the madness. How many CLASS A watts would this amp put into a 50 ohm load? What's the ETA on the release date? Why are the speaker post so far apart? No idea on release date. If I had to guess because Im not entirely clear on how class A works, it would put out significantly less watts into a 50 ohm load.The speaker posts are far apart on the xpa-1 because I guess for safety? I have no idea why they are so far apart on the xpa-1l. Probably for the added sexiness qoutient. |
|
Erwin.BE
Emo VIPs
It's the room, stupid!
Posts: 2,269
|
Post by Erwin.BE on Sept 20, 2012 2:31:35 GMT -5
Why are the speaker post so far apart? Fully balanced quad differential amp architecture. See XPA-1. One side of the amp is the "hot" leg and the other the "cold" leg. Where in the XPA-2 each side is for a whole channel. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 20, 2012 2:57:13 GMT -5
^^I think what he said makes more sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Sept 20, 2012 3:28:04 GMT -5
Sorry for the ridiculous questions. However, there is a reason for the madness. How many CLASS A watts would this amp put into a 50 ohm load? Going by my 15.5V speculation from the last page that would be about 5 Class A Watts into 50 ohms, still not bad. |
|
|
|
Post by preproman on Sept 20, 2012 14:32:45 GMT -5
Thanks guys..
|
|
|
|
Post by chipbyrd on Sept 23, 2012 23:13:50 GMT -5
I was thinking about getting a pair of XPA - 100's, but these ound better. Is there a link to their specs? Cost? Availability?
Thanks,
Chip
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 23, 2012 23:29:53 GMT -5
It can be found in the emofest 2012 thread and the post your emofest pictures thread. 30 watts class A. I believe half the wattage of the XPA-1. Fully balanced like the xpa-1 and pretty much everything like an xpa-1 in half. Im not sure about the gain.
|
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Sept 24, 2012 14:05:42 GMT -5
Does anyone have pictures of the innards of an XPA-1L ?
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,085
|
Post by klinemj on Sept 24, 2012 17:06:59 GMT -5
I don't think you will see that. As I recall, there was only there and it still had its "top on"...net, no nude shots were available. I'll double-check my camera, but that's my recollection.
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Sept 24, 2012 17:58:30 GMT -5
I don't think you will see that. As I recall, there was only there and it still had its "top on"...net, no nude shots were available. I'll double-check my camera, but that's my recollection. Mark Hey thanks Mark for the effort checking! |
|
|
|
Post by roadrunner on Sept 24, 2012 20:02:30 GMT -5
I don't think you will see that. As I recall, there was only there and it still had its "top on"...net, no nude shots were available. I'll double-check my camera, but that's my recollection. Mark Mark, That was my recollection as well. I made it a point to look for a unit with its top removed and was unable to find one. I had my camera primed and ready to take pictures of the innards, but unfortunately there were none to be found. I guess we will have to wait to find out what kind of magic Lonnie worked into the design... dadgumit! |
|
