|
|
Post by speakerbuilder on Jan 26, 2013 15:14:11 GMT -5
Hello, brand new to the forum. I am wanting to get back into separates after a long hiatus of integrateds and seriously thinking of getting 2 of the new XPA-100s for my system. I have seen some talk of the 100s, at least talk about them, but no serious reviews, or anyone who has actually bought them, give a review or thoughts. I have seen all the stuff and read almost everything in the XPA-2 (including the comparisons and side by sides on the UPA-1 to the XPA-2) , the XPA-1 and the new XPA-200. All of those seem well covered and listened to, but not the XPA-100.  I am intrigued by the mono-block idea, but not the price and power of the XPA-1s. Also, I live in central CA, so getting to the show room, or even the Orange Co. Emofest this spring is a little cost prohibitive... ya know with gas prices and all. So can anyone help? Has anyone had a good listen to them? Especially a side by side with the XPA-2 or the 200. Sound advantages/ disadvantages? Sound characteristics? Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by broncsrule21 on Jan 26, 2013 22:55:12 GMT -5
I also would like to read some reviews. I'm thinking about getting one to run my center. At the same time, I would tell you that it is going to be an excelent performer. It is just about the same amp as the UPA-1. A little more power, not much. I went from a UPA-2 to the UPA-1s. The main difference to me was soundstage..depth and speration. Then I went to a RPA-1. The difference between the RPA and these monoblocks is minimal. I don't think I could tell the difference between the two in most cases. This is a great compliment to the UPA-1. The RPA series are highly regarded amps. I'm just saying I'm sure you cant go wrong with the XPA-100. More than enough juice in most situations...unless you have speakers that are EXTEMELY hard to drive. I hope this helps even though I don't own this amp. Yet..
|
|
|
|
Post by speakerbuilder on Jan 27, 2013 0:44:29 GMT -5
Thanx Broncsrule21, I think it will be a performer too, especially based on all the numbers and reviews on similar stuff like the UPA-1. I would just like to hear some first hand thoughts, especially since the XPA-100 pair costs more than an XPA-2 and the XPA-2 has some slightly better numbers. But you are right that the XPA-100 definitely has plenty of power, at least for what I need.
|
|
|
|
Post by broncsrule21 on Jan 27, 2013 1:13:22 GMT -5
What I want to know is......are the blue/amber lights the same shade as the UPA-1/2 that I already own. I know it is petty but I care about that stuff. Haha
|
|
|
|
Post by deltadube on Jan 28, 2013 6:36:03 GMT -5
yeah would be great to see some reviews on the xpa 100...
and volume discounts for a set of 5..
cheers
|
|
|
|
Post by bartman on Jan 30, 2013 23:39:10 GMT -5
I'll provide you some comments and observations more than an in-depth review as I bought a couple XPA-100's two weeks ago. I was given some nice 13 year old Linn speakers (Keilidh) over the holidays that are rated at 4 ohms but my Pioneer Elite AV receiver is not. I ran them bi-amped for awhile and they sounded really good but I was afraid to drive them too hard because the Elite would get pretty warm. Hence, my purchase of the monoblocks. I got them because of the good reviews of Emotiva products, the power, 4 ohm compatibility, and because they would fit in my TV stand. I have them bi-wired now and they sound really good. Very good bass and mid range. They sound very smooth and blend well with my Polk center and surrounds. I'm playing with the speaker angle and position to brighten up the soundstage. And speaking of soundstage, it is better now with the XPA-100's. Much better breadth and depth. I have much more volume now and the 100's don't even break a sweat when pushed. I am pleased with them and am thinking of upgrading my center channel speaker and adding another XPA-100 to drive it. I watch more movies than I listen to CD's but that is changing now. I don't regret my purchase at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by deltadube on Feb 3, 2013 5:19:56 GMT -5
I'll provide you some comments and observations more than an in-depth review as I bought a couple XPA-100's two weeks ago. I was given some nice 13 year old Linn speakers (Keilidh) over the holidays that are rated at 4 ohms but my Pioneer Elite AV receiver is not. I ran them bi-amped for awhile and they sounded really good but I was afraid to drive them too hard because the Elite would get pretty warm. Hence, my purchase of the monoblocks. I got them because of the good reviews of Emotiva products, the power, 4 ohm compatibility, and because they would fit in my TV stand. I have them bi-wired now and they sound really good. Very good bass and mid range. They sound very smooth and blend well with my Polk center and surrounds. I'm playing with the speaker angle and position to brighten up the soundstage. And speaking of soundstage, it is better now with the XPA-100's. Much better breadth and depth. I have much more volume now and the 100's don't even break a sweat when pushed. I am pleased with them and am thinking of upgrading my center channel speaker and adding another XPA-100 to drive it. I watch more movies than I listen to CD's but that is changing now. I don't regret my purchase at all. nice to hear.. im tempted to go for the xpa 100s too.. for the channel separation.. the xpa 2 seems a bit too much power.. for my speakers 250 w .. but then again the xpa 5.. hope you enjoy.. |
|
|
|
Post by ocezam on Feb 3, 2013 17:23:16 GMT -5
I'll provide you some comments and observations more than an in-depth review as I bought a couple XPA-100's two weeks ago. I was given some nice 13 year old Linn speakers (Keilidh) over the holidays that are rated at 4 ohms but my Pioneer Elite AV receiver is not. I ran them bi-amped for awhile and they sounded really good but I was afraid to drive them too hard because the Elite would get pretty warm. Hence, my purchase of the monoblocks. I got them because of the good reviews of Emotiva products, the power, 4 ohm compatibility, and because they would fit in my TV stand. I have them bi-wired now and they sound really good. Very good bass and mid range. They sound very smooth and blend well with my Polk center and surrounds. I'm playing with the speaker angle and position to brighten up the soundstage. And speaking of soundstage, it is better now with the XPA-100's. Much better breadth and depth. I have much more volume now and the 100's don't even break a sweat when pushed. I am pleased with them and am thinking of upgrading my center channel speaker and adding another XPA-100 to drive it. I watch more movies than I listen to CD's but that is changing now. I don't regret my purchase at all. nice to hear.. im tempted to go for the xpa 100s too.. for the channel separation.. the xpa 2 seems a bit too much power.. for my speakers 250 w .. but then again the xpa 5.. hope you enjoy.. XPA-2: Too much power? Hardly. www.axiomaudio.com/power.... |
|
|
|
Post by subdusted on Sept 8, 2013 14:25:45 GMT -5
I've had XPA-100, XPA-200, XPA-2, XPA-1L... My vote goes to XPA-2 , best bang for the buck. XPA-100s are a little raw to my taste, XPA-2 definitely belongs to a higher class. Also, XPA-2 is a true balanced amp, while I am not so sure about XPA-100s, they may, just like their cousin XPA-200 only have balanced inputs, but not topology.
|
|
novisnick
EmoPhile
CEO Secret Monoblock Society
Posts: 27,223 
|
Post by novisnick on Sept 8, 2013 14:32:46 GMT -5
I've had XPA-100, XPA-200, XPA-2, XPA-1L... My vote goes to XPA-2 , best bang for the buck. XPA-100s are a little raw to my taste, XPA-2 definitely belongs to a higher class. Also, XPA-2 is a true balanced amp, while I am not so sure about XPA-100s, they may, just like their cousin XPA-200 only have balanced inputs, but not topology. No mention of the XPA-1L at all? Really?  |
|
novisnick
EmoPhile
CEO Secret Monoblock Society
Posts: 27,223
|
Post by novisnick on Sept 8, 2013 14:38:53 GMT -5
I'll provide you some comments and observations more than an in-depth review as I bought a couple XPA-100's two weeks ago. I was given some nice 13 year old Linn speakers (Keilidh) over the holidays that are rated at 4 ohms but my Pioneer Elite AV receiver is not. I ran them bi-amped for awhile and they sounded really good but I was afraid to drive them too hard because the Elite would get pretty warm. Hence, my purchase of the monoblocks. I got them because of the good reviews of Emotiva products, the power, 4 ohm compatibility, and because they would fit in my TV stand. I have them bi-wired now and they sound really good. Very good bass and mid range. They sound very smooth and blend well with my Polk center and surrounds. I'm playing with the speaker angle and position to brighten up the soundstage. And speaking of soundstage, it is better now with the XPA-100's. Much better breadth and depth. I have much more volume now and the 100's don't even break a sweat when pushed. I am pleased with them and am thinking of upgrading my center channel speaker and adding another XPA-100 to drive it. I watch more movies than I listen to CD's but that is changing now. I don't regret my purchase at all. nice to hear.. im tempted to go for the xpa 100s too.. for the channel separation.. the xpa 2 seems a bit too much power.. for my speakers 250 w .. but then again the xpa 5.. hope you enjoy.. |
|
novisnick
EmoPhile
CEO Secret Monoblock Society
Posts: 27,223
|
Post by novisnick on Sept 8, 2013 14:41:13 GMT -5
XPA-5 is fine and plenty of power for your surrounds. I've enjoyed mine from day one.
|
|
|
|
Post by danny01 on Sept 8, 2013 14:51:34 GMT -5
I've had XPA-100, XPA-200, XPA-2, XPA-1L... My vote goes to XPA-2 , best bang for the buck. XPA-100s are a little raw to my taste, XPA-2 definitely belongs to a higher class. Also, XPA-2 is a true balanced amp, while I am not so sure about XPA-100s, they may, just like their cousin XPA-200 only have balanced inputs, but not topology. XPA-2 is NOT fully balanced. It just has XLR just like the UPA-1, XPA100/200. The XPA-1L however, is fully balanced. The XPA-100 is very similar to the UPA-1. So reading reviews of the UPA-1 might give you a good idea of how the XPA-100 will sound. I agree with the post quoted above. The XPA-2 is a helluva an amp, especially Gen 2. So that gets my vote over the XPA-100, unless you can step up to the XPA-1L for a bit more dough. The 1L's advertised specs actually show it doubling down from 8 to 4 ohms, hinting that it has not power supply limited. Of course it just probably means that Emotiva is understating the power into 8 ohms as no amp can truly double down into half the resistance. Sent from my HTC6500LVW using proboards |
|
|
|
Post by deltadube on Sept 8, 2013 15:05:30 GMT -5
nice to hear.. im tempted to go for the xpa 100s too.. for the channel separation.. the xpa 2 seems a bit too much power.. for my speakers 250 w .. but then again the xpa 5.. hope you enjoy.. xpa 3 or 5 is good for surrounds nick guess the xpr 5 would be best.. cheers |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 8, 2013 15:20:20 GMT -5
I've had XPA-100, XPA-200, XPA-2, XPA-1L... My vote goes to XPA-2 , best bang for the buck. XPA-100s are a little raw to my taste, XPA-2 definitely belongs to a higher class. Also, XPA-2 is a true balanced amp, while I am not so sure about XPA-100s, they may, just like their cousin XPA-200 only have balanced inputs, but not topology. No mention of the XPA-1L at all? Really? XPA-2 isn't a true balanced amp. It also doesn't bring the advantage of monoblocks in terms of better separation - at least technically. Your XPA-1 L's are a true balanced amp. Emotiva's word for true balanced is "quad differential" - not dual differential. The XPA-1 L, XPA-1, XPR-1 are the only true balanced designs. Having said that, the XPA-2 is one heck of an amp while the XPA-100 shares more in design with the older u-series. At their current price point the XPA-100 isn't the incredible bargains that the other Emotiva amps are like the XPA-2, XPA-1 L. Though if the UPA-2 is anything to go by it certainly sounds darn nice. If I had the money I would buy two XPA-1 L's but if not, it would be an XPA-2. |
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Sept 8, 2013 15:25:22 GMT -5
Just wait for the XXXXXPPPPR-1 or XXXXPPPRR-5 and it will be the last amp you will ever need....Of course that is until the XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXPPPPPPPRRRRRR series comes along....  |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 8, 2013 15:28:14 GMT -5
No the last amp you would ever need is the ZPR's.  |
|
|
|
Post by deltadube on Sept 8, 2013 15:54:27 GMT -5
No the last amp you would ever need is the ZPR's. yeah the zpr 1s cant waite... cheers |
|
|
|
Post by danny01 on Sept 8, 2013 16:58:45 GMT -5
Having said that, the XPA-2 is one heck of an amp while the XPA-100 shares more in design with the older u-series. At their current price point the XPA-100 isn't the incredible bargains that the other Emotiva amps are like the XPA-2, XPA-1 L. I disagree. The XPA-100 is an X series design. While it is almost identical to the older UPA-1, that UPA-1 amp was the only amp in the U series that had an X series module in it. The UPA-1 was actually a monoblock version of the 3 and 5 channel X series amps which were quite different in terms of power to the rest of the U series amps. However I do agree that the XPA-100 isn't so much of a bargain compared to Emotiva's other mono amps. The true bargain was the UPA-1. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 8, 2013 17:17:31 GMT -5
Having said that, the XPA-2 is one heck of an amp while the XPA-100 shares more in design with the older u-series. At their current price point the XPA-100 isn't the incredible bargains that the other Emotiva amps are like the XPA-2, XPA-1 L. I disagree. The XPA-100 is an X series design. While it is almost identical to the older UPA-1, that UPA-1 amp was the only amp in the U series that had an X series module in it. The UPA-1 was actually a monoblock version of the 3 and 5 channel X series amps which were quite different in terms of power to the rest of the U series amps. However I do agree that the XPA-100 isn't so much of a bargain compared to Emotiva's other mono amps. The true bargain was the UPA-1. I may be wrong here but the UPA-2 uses two amp blades of the x-series too. Those were the two main amps I was thinking of. I forgot about the UPA-5 and 7. They mentioned that the reason they had problems with the u-series is that it had so much of the x-series components. Though I'm not too happy with how they remedied it but I guess it makes sense for business. And though the price is now higher, I am very happy they didn't retire these absolute gems of amplifiers. The XPA-200 and XPA-100 are worth the money easily. But not quite the same value as the other gear. It's hard to criticize a company for offering slightly less of a steal than they usually do that I actually feel guilty. The UPA-1 was going to actually be my upgrade. Everybody talks about its musicality and you know what they are right. The UPA-2 (I know, different) has a cohesiveness ambience to its soundstage - a sound signature of sorts that the faster XPA-2 doesn't have. It's still the weaker amp compared to the XPA-2 in terms of speed but it brings so very much to the table and that sound signature of it is very addictive especially for a room my size. Having heard the XPA-2, I think I'm going to have to save up probably about a decade ;D for the XPA-1 gen 2's. What a winner - just like the XPA-1 L. It actually takes care of the only SLIGHT "reservation" of the XPA-1 L which was the size of the power supply. |
|
I am intrigued by the mono-block idea, but not the price and power of the XPA-1s. Also, I live in central CA, so getting to the show room, or even the Orange Co. Emofest this spring is a little cost prohibitive... ya know with gas prices and all.
