|
|
Post by audiophill on Mar 27, 2013 6:55:29 GMT -5
It definitely depends on your speakers. I have very efficient Klipsch horn loaded speakers so the xpr-5 i own is a bit of overkill, therefore the 35 watts of class a in the xpa-1l's works perfect for those speakers. Now if i ever change to magnepan which i would love to audition some day i'm not so sure i would use the xpa-1ls on them. They may work fine and sound good at lower volumes but since the magnepan speakers are very un efficient i am future proof with the loads of power the xpr has. There is a very subtle difference in the sound quality but i would rather have the greater power for greater head room in maggies, but for now with my klipsch the xpa-1l's will be fine as i don't have the money for maggies right now especially while waiting for the xmc-1 to come out so i can buy that. I think all the Emotiva amps are very good and a lot depends on the other components in each particular system especially the speakers.
|
|
|
|
Post by ocezam on Mar 27, 2013 7:54:45 GMT -5
"Class A monoblocks" - and it's Emotiva's marketing on this particular piece that you happen to pass on that I found silly. What I find silly is your insistance that a mention of this amp's class A feature be followed with the caveat that it's "only" for the first 35 watts. I think we're all aware of this. In fact, it's hardly a shortcoming. More class A bias would add much more heat and little improvement to SQ. Yes, literally they are mono-blocks albeit at 35 lbs. I didn't catch this complaint in your original post. Apparently mono blocks need to meet a certain minimum weight threshold before being referred to as such? I guess I missed this in the audiophile's hand book. Whatever will companies such as Red Dragon or Wyred4Sound do to get their amps to meet your criteria? So, I think they s/b referred to as "baby partial class A monoblocks".  Jeez, really? OK. But restating the obvious sure will make everyone's post unnecessarily long. Like i said, I'll find out 4/13 at Emofest on the road in Naperville. I shall await your review with great anticipation. One size does not fit all and I don't understand why you have to defend the XPA-1L so passionately. Don't you think that its silly to do so? it's just one person's opinion big fella. I wasn't defending the XPA-1L at all. I was rebutting your use of the pejorative "silly". It's a dismissive term often used by audio elitests when they have nothing substantive to say. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2013 8:01:29 GMT -5
I think many folks would be surprised at how little power they actually use in day-to-day operation. Unless your speakers are very inefficient (< 86 db), you will probably be operating in Class A mode most of the time with the XPA-1L...
-RW-
|
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 3,435
|
Post by Lsc on Mar 27, 2013 14:41:19 GMT -5
"Class A monoblocks" - and it's Emotiva's marketing on this particular piece that you happen to pass on that I found silly. What I find silly is your insistance that a mention of this amp's class A feature be followed with the caveat that it's "only" for the first 35 watts. I think we're all aware of this. In fact, it's hardly a shortcoming. More class A bias would add much more heat and little improvement to SQ. I didn't catch this complaint in your original post. Apparently mono blocks need to meet a certain minimum weight threshold before being referred to as such? I guess I missed this in the audiophile's hand book. Whatever will companies such as Red Dragon or Wyred4Sound do to get their amps to meet your criteria? Jeez, really? OK. But restating the obvious sure will make everyone's post unnecessarily long. I shall await your review with great anticipation. One size does not fit all and I don't understand why you have to defend the XPA-1L so passionately. Don't you think that its silly to do so? it's just one person's opinion big fella. I wasn't defending the XPA-1L at all. I was rebutting your use of the pejorative "silly". It's a dismissive term often used by audio elitests when they have nothing substantive to say. This whole back and forth is just silly. You get a c'mon man for this! I'm not a forum elitist so I can't do these fancy multiple quotes like you. Back to under my rock I go.  Why didn't you quote me having the same amp as you? Pretty spiteful over one word I must say. I am mainly going to check out the XPR-2 / XPR-5 but I will give the XPA-1L a listen just because I know you are waiting for me to eat crow. I already said, I am sure it's very good. So, at worst maybe I'll be forced to say it's AMAZING and superior to the XPR-2. Either way, I won't feel badly about it. |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,435
|
Post by Lsc on Apr 19, 2013 22:57:46 GMT -5
I shall await your review with great anticipation. Sorry to keep you waiting but there was nothing to review because the setup was not what I expected. The amps were not hooked up where you can a/b them, just plugged in. I will admit the XPA-1Ls looked a little more substantial in person than what I expected. However, the XPR-2 looked like a true high end power amp that looked like a tank. It also ran very very warm. When inquired an Emo official said "that's cause we gave it a little more class A, meaning XPR-1&2 vs XPR-5. I ended up buying the XPR-5 with less class A. Nevertheless, my system has been transformed by the addition of this amazing amp. The Revel F208/C208/F12 combo are prisoners to the mighty XPR-5. The speed and dynamics are incredible and I'm looking for more music everyday to listen as much as I can. Therefore, given that the XPR-2 will be at least as good as the XPR-5 and should be better (of course), while I'm sure the XPA-1L will end up being a sweet amp, I'll stick with my XPR-2 advice. If the XPR-5 sounded as good as McIntosh MC601 monoblocks per another forum member, it's more than good enough for me and XPR-2 probably raises that a few notches. Good job OP keeping it. It was the right move. And as a last thought, IMHO the XPRs look waaaaay better than the XPR-1L too. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by ocezam on Apr 20, 2013 15:29:59 GMT -5
I shall await your review with great anticipation. Sorry to keep you waiting but there was nothing to review because the setup was not what I expected. The amps were not hooked up where you can a/b them, just plugged in. That's OK. Truth be told, I wasn't really waiting... the XPR-2 looked like a true high end power amp that looked like a tank. It also ran very very warm. When inquired an Emo official said "that's cause we gave it a little more class A, meaning XPR-1&2 vs XPR-5. I find this interesting. Several months ago on another thread several of us were guessing the XPR-2 and 1 might have a high class A bias due to their overly warm operation. Someone from Emotiva chimed in stating that it's class A was only about a watt. It would be nice if Emotiva posted specs on this for each amp. I ended up buying the XPR-5 with less class A. Nevertheless, my system has been transformed by the addition of this amazing amp. The Revel F208/C208/F12 combo are prisoners to the mighty XPR-5. The speed and dynamics are incredible and I'm looking for more music everyday to listen as much as I can. And that's awesome. Anytime you add or switch a component, and that makes you search for new music, you made a great choice!!! And as a last thought, IMHO the XPRs look waaaaay better than the XPR-1L too. ;D Can't agree with you here here. The word behemoth leaps to my mind. but it ain't about the looks anyway. Glad you're happy! Wish I could have been at the show. Looking forward to seeing the Emotiva crew at this years Rocky Mountain Audio Fest. .... |
|
|
|
Post by milt99 on Apr 20, 2013 17:11:04 GMT -5
Just a personal note, I buy amps because of how they sound not how they look.
OTOH, I bought the XPA-1Ls to certain degree because they AREN'T monsters.
|
|
|
|
Post by danr on Apr 20, 2013 19:39:01 GMT -5
Just a personal note, I buy amps because of how they sound not how they look. OTOH, I bought the XPA-1Ls to certain degree because they AREN'T monsters. Of course...looks are a secondary concern...I believe that's why he mentioned it last. But let's be clear, it's not just the "looks" of the XPR...the build quality is also better than the XPA series. And given the price differential, it should be. Monoblocks that aren't monsters doesn't compute with me. But don't let me ruin your enjoyment of your "little monoblocks".   |
|
|
|
Post by milt99 on Apr 20, 2013 20:43:44 GMT -5
Say hello to my little monoblock: Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by danr on Apr 20, 2013 23:03:15 GMT -5
Nice Milt!
|
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,435
|
Post by Lsc on Apr 21, 2013 10:17:33 GMT -5
Yes. That's why I mentioned looks last.
An emo official said 10 watts at class A.
|
|
|
|
Post by ocezam on Apr 21, 2013 11:12:09 GMT -5
An emo official said 10 watts at class A. And that contradicts what an Emo official stated on this board. It would be great if Emotiva published this spec as Pass does. ... |
|
|
|
Post by danr on Apr 21, 2013 11:49:49 GMT -5
Yes. That's why I mentioned looks last. An emo official said 10 watts at class A. I don't remember that. I just remember "I gave it a little more"... And then there was some winking and laughing. |
|
|
|
Post by milt99 on Apr 21, 2013 12:52:58 GMT -5
danr & lsc, I see you both have Revel F208s & XPR amps.
Are the Revels that power hungry?
FWIW, I have a pair of Studio2s that the XPA-1Ls are driving.
|
|
|
|
Post by danr on Apr 21, 2013 15:12:23 GMT -5
^ LSC has been trying to copy me for a while now. Are the Revels that power hungry...probably not. But the XPR is a better and less "electronic" sounding amp through the mids & highs than the XPA series. The F208s are capable of great dynamics and bass. I want the extreme power to know I'm squeezing all I can out of them. I have no reservations in recommending any of the three XPR amps, and that's not just for home theater. |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,435
|
Post by Lsc on Apr 21, 2013 16:22:06 GMT -5
They are power hungry. Because the more you feed it, the more it wants. Just like danr Those studio2s are capable of monster dynamics. XPR all the way. That beryllium tweeter is so sweet along with that liquid midrange, you don't need the alleged extra helping hand from the xpa-1L. The xprs have a great top end and bottom end. Think "ideal woman" here. |
|
|
|
Post by milt99 on Apr 21, 2013 18:21:53 GMT -5
I've read that the F208s are really dang close in performance to Studio2s and if that is true or even close to true then they are a steal for the price.
I've had the Studio2s since January and have been dying to get some amp(s) hooked up that have some decent power.
I do have that BAT 6200 in my HT\Music room but I really don't want to disconnect and lug it upstairs where the Revels are.
The thing weighs like 160lbs with 3 channels installed. UGH!
I don't really fell like lugging the Revels downstairs either although I really want to at some point to test because the acoustics in the HT room are far better than my living room.
|
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,435
|
Post by Lsc on Apr 21, 2013 19:52:12 GMT -5
If you are looking at two channel and want to stay near the cost of the 2 XPA-1Ls then the choice is obvious -XPR-2.
You won't believe how crazy good your studio2s will sound.
Man, that's a big amp! Well, just to make sure you may want to hook up that BAT. Is that as powerful as the XPR-2?
|
|
|
|
Post by danr on Apr 21, 2013 21:40:22 GMT -5
Because the more you feed it, the more it wants. Just like danr Wait, are we talking my belly, or my ego? Or both.   |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,435
|
Post by Lsc on Apr 22, 2013 17:29:55 GMT -5
I just looked at the test reports for the XPA-1L. 350W into 8 ohms and 550W into 4 ohms.
Maybe I have been underestimating this amp all along. This is pretty close XPR-5 although in 2 channels it does 500W into 8 ohms and 750W into 4 ohms.
I just never liked them calling it a "class A monoblock" so maybe I was biased. (no pun intended)
|
|
Why didn't you quote me having the same amp as you? Pretty spiteful over one word I must say.
