|
|
Post by kzone on Oct 22, 2012 22:02:27 GMT -5
What I observe over time, is that Emotiva's engineering is questioned moreso thasn McIntosh, Krell, etc., because they charge less for their components. And, the thought seems to be that if it costs less, there must have been detrimental compromises. I truly believe that if a high-end manufacturer had made the XSP-1 and charged excessively more for it, these discussions would be moot. Therefore, rather than questioning construction, let us hear about definable deficiencies and discuss how they can be rectified. If there are none, let us move away from quibbling and enjoy the music. Its not because its emotiva.. look at the connectors on the XPA1 here. Its not what I expect from Emotiva's flagship.  I expect to at least see this instead, but I'm not questioning emotiva's just sharing what I feel and expectations. Emotiva ultimately decide what they want to put it their products and we consumers decide what to spend on. And I choose to spend on the XPA1 and change the connectors myself  |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Oct 22, 2012 22:25:10 GMT -5
I can see your point, non-locking XLR's and internal mounting RCA's (or whatever the proper name is).
To move back to the XSP-1 it looks like a definite improvement, Tiffany style RCA's and locking XLR's - looks very nice.
|
|
|
|
Post by kzone on Oct 22, 2012 22:46:41 GMT -5
To move back to the XSP-1 it looks like a definite improvement, Tiffany style RCA's and locking XLR's - looks very nice. yeah the XSP's behind looks awesome! wud love to see her internal circuitry too.. hoepfully nicer than this :  |
|
emovac
Emo VIPs 
Saeed al-Sahhaf
Posts: 2,456
|
Post by emovac on Oct 23, 2012 1:07:48 GMT -5
Had Emo charged $2,599.00 for the XSP-1, no one would question its performance. Old biases die slowly or not at all. Probably in that price class, there are a much greater number of options. What makes Emotiva attractive is good performance at a low price point. Nice pic of that Wyred amp. They build stuff pretty darn well. |
|
|
|
Post by rclark on Oct 23, 2012 1:28:07 GMT -5
If Emo charged $2599 for the XSP-1, then it had better perform in that price class. I know this is hard to believe, but there are actually preamps worth that much and more.
|
|
|
|
Post by kzone on Oct 23, 2012 1:45:00 GMT -5
$2599 wud bring it within touching distance to the lower models of brands like Audio Research, Conrad Johnson, plinius, bryston etc. At this level, many sounds good which then depends on personal preferences
|
|
|
|
Post by villock on Oct 23, 2012 1:48:22 GMT -5
If Emo charged $2599 for the XSP-1, then it had better perform in that price class. I know this is hard to believe, but there are actually preamps worth that much and more. If Emo charged me $2599.00 for my XMC-1 it had better be in fully descrete mode whatever way I tell it to be. I would need Lonnie to respond to my inquiries on a dialy basis, heck I want to be pipelined into his office, car and living room. While emo is at it I want it to serve me a hot cup o' joe in the morning, remain dust free at all times and I better be able to disable the darn blue lights, actually I want it to disappear from my rack. Oh and I want it to make my wife have sex with me when I say so not when SHE says so  |
|
|
|
Post by GreenKiwi on Oct 23, 2012 1:49:10 GMT -5
It's all about hitting both performance and price. There are lots of little things, like connectors, etc. that are only a buck or two here and there. But one has to look at the whole BOM and see what is the best value per $ in the BOM. And how that price places you in the market. You could answer yes to every one of those should I go up a buck or down a buck, but then you'd have a final product that might be $50, or $200.
That might be ok, no competitors in that space either way... or it might bump you out of reach of most of your target customer base.
In this case, I'd imagine that the X series is still a bit of a compromise. And the R series will have even less compromise. If you're aiming at a $2000 system, instead of $1000, you have a lot more engineering flexibility.
And I'd add, that Emo seems to hit these quite well. There are always compromises, but they seem to put the compromises in the right places more often than not.
|
|
|
|
Post by rclark on Oct 23, 2012 1:54:12 GMT -5
If Emo charged $2599 for the XSP-1, then it had better perform in that price class. I know this is hard to believe, but there are actually preamps worth that much and more. If Emo charged me $2599.00 for my XMC-1 it had better be in fully descrete mode whatever way I tell it to be. I would need Lonnie to respond to my inquiries on a dialy basis, heck I want to be pipelined into his office, car and living room. While emo is at it I want it to serve me a hot cup o' joe in the morning, remain dust free at all times and I better be able to disable the darn blue lights, actually I want it to disappear from my rack. Oh and I want it to make my wife have sex with me when I say so not when SHE says so But then you've just got a $200 pre with some perks! I'd just take the $2599 pre worth $2599 and call it good. |
|
|
|
Post by kzone on Oct 23, 2012 2:17:36 GMT -5
In this case, I'd imagine that the X series is still a bit of a compromise. And the R series will have even less compromise. If you're aiming at a $2000 system, instead of $1000, you have a lot more engineering flexibility. quote] Its not exactly clear to me that the R series is about higher quality products fm Emotiva. So far, it seems be only higher powered and geared towards HT. In fact, it seems less stereo fidelity than the 2 channel X series items |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Oct 23, 2012 3:42:53 GMT -5
In this case, I'd imagine that the X series is still a bit of a compromise. And the R series will have even less compromise. If you're aiming at a $2000 system, instead of $1000, you have a lot more engineering flexibility. I agree, the X series is a solid step up from the U, and the R should be another solid step, there shouldn't be any qualities in the X series that aren't equaled or bettered in an R. It seems there is now something for an RSP-1 to aspire to - fully balanced bass management, and tone controls; or maybe TaCT - though then your going digital and maybe that doesn't belong in an analog preamp. Someone mentioned a BAT and I checked to see if they offered anything like an XSP-1, doesn't look like it - pure line stages, made me wonder if anyone has a fully balanced, full featured preamp like this, without a *. Edit: Just checked the Mac C-2300 (my current choice for a $6000 preamp:~), it does have tone controls but no BM, and while it has lots of XLR connections and it specs balanced ins and outs, it lists the circuitry as "single ended". |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,084
|
Post by klinemj on Oct 23, 2012 20:31:08 GMT -5
I don't know what's in store for the r-series preamp (assuming there is one...) - but if they can make a jump in sound quality to the R like they did to the X...I am "in".
Time will tell.
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Oct 23, 2012 21:42:46 GMT -5
At this rate they will have to seriously step up their DACS to keep up with the XSP!
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Oct 24, 2012 0:39:38 GMT -5
At this rate they will have to seriously step up their DACS to keep up with the XSP!  Who? DACs in the XSP? Sorry, I didn't make the connection. |
|
|
|
Post by rclark on Oct 24, 2012 0:52:48 GMT -5
Ahem.
He's saying the quality of their dacs will need to match the apparent high quality of the XSP. This confused you?
|
|
|
|
Post by rclark on Oct 24, 2012 0:53:48 GMT -5
I don't know what's in store for the r-series preamp (assuming there is one...) - but if they can make a jump in sound quality to the R like they did to the X...I am "in". Time will tell. Mark There's always better Mark. Remember your amp skepticism. There's always better. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Oct 24, 2012 1:02:12 GMT -5
Ahem. He's saying the quality of their dacs will need to match the apparent high quality of the XSP. This confused you? Who's DACs? Sorry again I went back a ways but missed a discussion of DACs in this thread. It's ok, I don't need to get it. |
|
|
|
Post by paintedklown on Oct 24, 2012 1:37:50 GMT -5
Ahem. He's saying the quality of their dacs will need to match the apparent high quality of the XSP. This confused you? Who's DACs? Sorry again I went back a ways but missed a discussion of DACs in this thread. It's ok, I don't need to get it. There wasn't a DAC discussion per se. What he was saying is that Emotiva need step up the SQ of their own DACs to equal the SQ that can be achieved with a nice source (in this case a DAC) in front of the XSP-1. In other words, he felt the performance of the XSP-1 was strong enough to show the weaknesses in the XDA-1. Therefore the XDA-2 and Pro DAC need to be equally good, to be optimal sources to put in front of it...or that is how I understood it anyway. ;D Hope that helps.  |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,084
|
Post by klinemj on Oct 24, 2012 6:12:58 GMT -5
And...I am suspecting we just might see that jump in DAC performance w/the ProDAC, if what we heard at Emofest was any indication.
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by geebo on Oct 24, 2012 7:14:06 GMT -5
And...I am suspecting we just might see that jump in DAC performance w/the ProDAC, if what we heard at Emofest was any indication. Mark +1 Mark. The little ProDAC was impressive. |
|
Who? DACs in the XSP? Sorry, I didn't make the connection. 
