|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on May 6, 2013 22:58:48 GMT -5
Great review! I found it interesting that he noted 10 watts of Class A power, we'd heard that for the XPA-1 before, but I don't remember an XPR-1 wattage previously mentioned. But it makes me wonder how you measure that?
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on May 7, 2013 0:26:45 GMT -5
So what $1,000 speakers can I use with these amps? Would it even make sense to power $1,000 or even $2,000 speakers with these amps?
|
|
|
|
Post by arthurz on May 7, 2013 0:31:15 GMT -5
So what $1,000 speakers can I use with these amps? Would it even make sense to power $1,000 or even $2,000 speakers with these amps? IMO, a very clear no. Upgrading the speakers in this price range is WAY more bang for the buck (compared to the XPA-1 => XPR-1 upgrade). I doubt many of them could even handle this kind of power. To answer the first part of the question, Maggie MMG would probably be the most power hungry cheap speaker I can think of. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on May 7, 2013 0:34:01 GMT -5
So what $1,000 speakers can I use with these amps? Would it even make sense to power $1,000 or even $2,000 speakers with these amps? I see "PaRaDiGm StUdIo 100 v3" in your signature, they should do just fine. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on May 7, 2013 0:51:30 GMT -5
So what $1,000 speakers can I use with these amps? Would it even make sense to power $1,000 or even $2,000 speakers with these amps? I see "PaRaDiGm StUdIo 100 v3" in your signature, they should do just fine. Cheers Gary Yeah those speakers really like to be played loud... |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on May 7, 2013 1:03:09 GMT -5
So what $1,000 speakers can I use with these amps? Would it even make sense to power $1,000 or even $2,000 speakers with these amps? Sure. Pick the speaker of your choice and hook em up. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2013 7:14:22 GMT -5
I totally agree with ArthurZ on this. When funds are limited, as they are for most of us, spending a larger portion on the speakers almost always results in better sound. Especially if you're talking a move from an XPA-1 to XPR-1. The XPA-1 is no slouch and will power almost any speaker to deafening levels...
-RW-
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Robinson on May 7, 2013 9:11:00 GMT -5
I totally agree with ArthurZ on this. When funds are limited, as they are for most of us, spending a larger portion on the speakers almost always results in better sound. Especially if you're talking a move from an XPA-1 to XPR-1. The XPA-1 is no slouch and will power almost any speaker to deafening levels... -RW- If I may weigh in. Disclaimer, I have not heard any of Emotiva's "big daddy" amplifiers, but my general feeling is this; when budgeting or making any purchasing decision, spend money on things that are quantifiable (video etc.) and let your ears and personal tastes dictate other items such as sound. Sound is a wholly subjective thing, which is why there are so many different ways to skin the proverbial cat so to speak. If you like the sound of a high dollar amp (note I didn't automatically dub it high-end) and can justify it, then by all means you should purchase it. But if an amp such as an Emotiva does it for you too, then buy that and take the money saved and apply it towards something that may not be as affordable. This is why my personal theater plays host to a wide range of products in terms of cost. For example; my projector retails for north of $20,000 (not bragging, just making a point) whereas my source component is $200, or my speakers $2,500. The myth that your components need be comparable in price across the board is exactly that -a myth. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2013 9:23:29 GMT -5
Andrew, you just made my point, but used a lot more words. Obviously, you value video over audio. If I had the money you budgeted for an AV system, I would have bought a $6,000 projector and dumped the remaining 14,000 into my amps and speakers. A $6K projector has 95% of the "goodness" of a 20K projector.
And the speakers would have gotten 75% of that 14,000. And $14K worth of speakers will *kill* $2,500 speakers - no ifs, ands, or buts about it. I value audio more than you...
-RW-
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Robinson on May 7, 2013 10:02:10 GMT -5
I value audio more than you... -RW- I wouldn't say that I under value audio (my other speakers are Bowers & Wilkins CT 8.2s ), it's just that video has set standard(s) that can either be reached/achieved or not. Sound on the other hand is largely left to the end user and/or their room/setup. A speaker can test brilliantly in a lab or chamber, but set it up wrong in a room or give it to someone who has tendency to juice the bass and watch all that "perfection" fly right out the window. I keep high dollar and budget gear in my house in order to see how far we've come and to keep both sides "honest". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2013 10:18:16 GMT -5
>> I wouldn't say that I under value audio (my other speakers are Bowers & Wilkins CT 8.2s ), it's just that video has set standard(s) that can either be reached/achieved or not. <<
I did not mean to imply that you "undervalue" audio, just that you value you it differently than do I. And video can be compromised by the room it is in, too. In my case, a projector is a non-starter - I have a high cathedral ceiling, light-colored walls and ceiling, skylights, and I'd have to mount a projector over 22 feet away from a screen. I doubt there is any home projector that can put out enough light under those circumstances. For me, some kind of flat-panel display was the way to go, hence my Mitsu DLP. I just wish I gotten the 65" model instead of the 60" I have. But it serves me quite adequately, and was very inexpensive.
However, even though my room is "video-challenged", it is quite good acoustically. For that reason, and because I'm an old audio guy from way back in the daze <g>, I tend to allocate more funds for the audio side of my AV system. That's why I have Gallo Reference speakers at all positions (except sub), a big enough Emo amp to drive them as loud as I'll ever need, a UMC-1 for the prepro (and, maybe, an XMC-1 when Emo releases it) and I opted for an Oppo universal player because I need to be able to play *every* type of shiny disc as well as networked/streaming media. Horses for courses, if you will...
Best Wishes,
-RW-
|
|
|
|
Post by sergeantynot on May 7, 2013 10:20:12 GMT -5
What I like about the XPR-1 review is that they tested them with speakers that retail for $50K. It would be rather overkill for a $3,000 XPR-1 set to be run with speakers that cost less.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2013 10:25:12 GMT -5
>> It would be rather overkill for a $3,000 XPR-1 set to be run with speakers that cost less. <<
Indeed. My *general* rule of thumb is to allocate twice to thrice the dollars for speakers as for amp/preamp. The law of diminishing returns kicks in quite early for amps, not so soon for speakers And this has served me quite well for over 40 years...
-RW-
|
|
|
|
Post by arthurz on May 7, 2013 10:39:11 GMT -5
Differences among good enough amps are subtle. Differences among speakers costing $1000 vs. $5000 are enormous. I remember checking out the B&W lineup and switching from the CM9 to the 804 Diamond. It was a massacre for the CM9, even though it seemed quite good on its own.
Another point about audio vs. video: I feel a LOT more comfortable throwing more money at the audio side because there's so little progress there. Video, on the other hand, is improving rapidly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2013 10:40:05 GMT -5
Andrew, those B&W speakers are a *very* interesting design! I have never seen a speaker that allows for the shifting of the TM module from a top mount to a center mount. How do they accommodate the woofers within the cabinet and ensure that their resonance does not compromise the TM output? Most designs generally try to isolate the TM (tweeter, midrange) speakers within their own "mini-cabinet". How do they accomplish this when the module is moved from the top position to the middle? And how does moving one of the woofers affect its interaction with the rest of the cabinet? B&W surely knows their stuff, I just wonder how they were able to pull that off...
My Gallo Ref. AV speakers approach this from a slightly different "angle" - they use the exact same driver complement in the same, fixed positions - except that the tweeter is rotated 90 deg. in the Center speaker with respect to the same speaker used as a main or surround. This allows them to optimize the cabinet (such as it is, each driver is in its own, round enclosure) as well as the dispersion/directivity of the tweeter for the position the speaker will occupy in the soundfield. Another "interesting" concept, and I can vouch that the speakers sound *very* good indeed...
-RW-
|
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on May 7, 2013 10:44:51 GMT -5
What I like about the XPR-1 review is that they tested them with speakers that retail for $50K. It would be rather overkill for a $3,000 XPR-1 set to be run with speakers that cost less. I have the XPR-5 running the Revel F208s. My buddy has the XPR-1s running his F208s (he has em across the front 3). He used to have the XPR-5 too. You can clearly tell the difference btw the XPR-5 vs. two XPR-1s. So, I'd say if you can tell the difference and think it's worth it, then it's not overkill. It sounds better with the XPR-1s and of course it should....and we don't have $50k speakers. Just making a point to the generalization. Thanks. |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on May 7, 2013 10:52:01 GMT -5
Differences among good enough amps are subtle. Differences among speakers costing $1000 vs. $5000 are enormous. I remember checking out the B&W lineup and switching from the CM9 to the 804 Diamond. It was a massacre for the CM9, even though it seemed quite good on its own. Another point about audio vs. video: I feel a LOT more comfortable throwing more money at the audio side because there's so little progress there. Video, on the other hand, is improving rapidly. I agree with all of the above. Speakers 1st and I don't really care about video. :-) |
|
|
|
Post by sergeantynot on May 7, 2013 11:02:05 GMT -5
What I like about the XPR-1 review is that they tested them with speakers that retail for $50K. It would be rather overkill for a $3,000 XPR-1 set to be run with speakers that cost less. I have the XPR-5 running the Revel F208s. My buddy has the XPR-1s running his F208s (he has em across the front 3). He used to have the XPR-5 too. You can clearly tell the difference btw the XPR-5 vs. two XPR-1s. So, I'd say if you can tell the difference and think it's worth it, then it's not overkill. It sounds better with the XPR-1s and of course it should....and we don't have $50k speakers. Just making a point to the generalization. Thanks. My point was that they didn't use the XPR-1s to test out some Bose Lifestyle satellites, or some other speaker system that cost $500/pair. Why would anyone spend $3K on amps to power a speaker that would not benefit it to begin with. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2013 11:04:16 GMT -5
Isc wrote:
"You can clearly tell the difference btw the XPR-5 vs. two XPR-1s. So, I'd say if you can tell the difference and think it's worth it, then it's not overkill."
And you've compared them in the same room at the same volume levels? If not, I think you might want to do so. It could be very instructive...
-RW-
|
|
|
|
Post by danr on May 7, 2013 11:30:22 GMT -5
rlw, yes, I can confirm he has...and it WAS quite instructive.  |
|
