|
|
Post by springwright on Jul 4, 2013 10:35:05 GMT -5
I got a chance to extensinely demo a XPR-5 and I was completely blown away by the sound quality of the amp compared to the XPA-5 (which I used to own). It would really be nice if the Emotiva folks built a lower powered version of it - say 200w/ch. I simply don't have a need for 400w/ch. in my theater. I really love what they have done with the Reference series amplifier topology.
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs 
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Jul 4, 2013 10:54:51 GMT -5
Why would they do that?
you like the XPR sound, buy the XPR.
400 v 200 watts comparison should not be the residing factor here and may actually be contributing to what you hear difference wise.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Mad Norseman on Jul 4, 2013 11:00:09 GMT -5
Why would they do that? you like the XPR sound, buy the XPR. 400 v 200 watts comparison should not be the residing factor here and may actually be contributing to what you hear difference wise. I agree. After all, technically you're only talking about a 3db difference in headroom - and who doesn't want more headroom?  If you like the sound of the XPR better, get that and don't look back. Then you're also set for the future if you ever decide to switch to less efficient speakers. The pricing is excellent too (compare the XPR-5 at 400w x 5, to the 250w x 5 Parasound Halo A51 and then tell me the Parasound is worth more than twice the price - NOT!). |
|
|
|
Post by Porscheguy on Jul 4, 2013 11:05:24 GMT -5
+1
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,487
|
Post by DYohn on Jul 4, 2013 11:24:51 GMT -5
Are you really looking for lower power or just lower cost? What if a 200WPC version costs more?  |
|
|
|
Post by danr on Jul 4, 2013 11:56:23 GMT -5
LOL! Isn't the big power the whole idea behind the XPR? I thought I saw on this forum that XPR was a moniker for "extreme power reference". Taking the high power away from the XPR...would mean its no longer an XPR. Kind of defeats the purpose. As others have said, if you want the XPR...then get the XPR. |
|
|
|
Post by springwright on Jul 4, 2013 20:14:58 GMT -5
LOL! Isn't the big power the whole idea behind the XPR? I thought I saw on this forum that XPR was a moniker for "extreme power reference". Taking the high power away from the XPR...would mean its no longer an XPR. Kind of defeats the purpose. As others have said, if you want the XPR...then get the XPR. Actually, I'm really more interested in the sound quality (sonic signature) that sets the XPR-5 apart from it's little bretheren. It's evident that the XPR's topology and construction features (toroid, filter capacitance, output transistors, etc.)is mostly responsible for that. Many have commented in the past that even the discontinued MPS series amps were a step up from the UPA (and X) series amps in sound quality. I just thought it would be neat if the features that sets the XPR apart could "trickle down " into maybe a 200 watt XPR ( lite) version or even on to the next generation of X series amps. Of course, that would mean that they would have to upgrade the entire XPR line upward to even a higher performance level ( scary thought). Maybe the collaboration with Bob Carver will bear fruit in further developing Emotiva's solid state amplifier lines. Don't get me wrong - everyone loves horsepower and having 400 watts (+3dB) available for HT is nice but I could do ok with half that. Just sayin'.............. |
|
|
|
Post by danr on Jul 4, 2013 20:53:44 GMT -5
I have it! the "KoXPSR-1"..."Kind of Extreme Power, Somewhat Reference - 1". The marketing slogan will be "250W, but much better sounding than our XPA-100."  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2013 22:16:08 GMT -5
LOL! Isn't the big power the whole idea behind the XPR? I thought I saw on this forum that XPR was a moniker for "extreme power reference". Taking the high power away from the XPR...would mean its no longer an XPR. Kind of defeats the purpose. As others have said, if you want the XPR...then get the XPR. Actually, I'm really more interested in the sound quality (sonic signature) that sets the XPR-5 apart from it's little bretheren. It's evident that the XPR's topology and construction features (toroid, filter capacitance, output transistors, etc.)is mostly responsible for that. Many have commented in the past that even the discontinued MPS series amps were a step up from the UPA (and X) series amps in sound quality. I just thought it would be neat if the features that sets the XPR apart could "trickle down " into maybe a 200 watt XPR ( lite) version or even on to the next generation of X series amps. Of course, that would mean that they would have to upgrade the entire XPR line upward to even a higher performance level ( scary thought). Maybe the collaboration with Bob Carver will bear fruit in further developing Emotiva's solid state amplifier lines. Don't get me wrong - everyone loves horsepower and having 400 watts (+3dB) available for HT is nice but I could do ok with half that. Just sayin'.............. Just like he said, if you're thinking of the XPR, then just get the XPR. I have an XPR-2 and XPR-5 and they are incredible!!!! My Martin Logan's are singing like never before. I've never seen them so happy!!! Lol |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jul 4, 2013 22:44:14 GMT -5
The hybrid you may want is probably the xpa-1 L's.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Jul 4, 2013 23:14:47 GMT -5
Just wait for the XPRWPCSS-1 (Xtreme Power Reference Watts Per Channel Sonic Signature) that might come up in two or three years and that will be the only amp anybody at the lounge will ever need. It will allow you to select the Watts per channel along with the Sonic Signature at a turn of a switch...  |
|
|
|
Post by GreenKiwi on Jul 4, 2013 23:59:01 GMT -5
@springwrite you might want to check out the previous series of amps, the RPA, MPS & IPS.
I'm not sure how closely their sonic signatures match the xpr series, but they are similar class H amps that are a bit lower powered, and sound excellent.
Note that all of these amps have separate power supplies for every channel I believe. The RPA is dual mono while the IPS and mps are 7 x mono.
I do love my IPS.
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Jul 5, 2013 9:49:26 GMT -5
LOL! Isn't the big power the whole idea behind the XPR? I thought I saw on this forum that XPR was a moniker for "extreme power reference". Taking the high power away from the XPR...would mean its no longer an XPR. Kind of defeats the purpose. As others have said, if you want the XPR...then get the XPR. Actually, I'm really more interested in the sound quality (sonic signature) that sets the XPR-5 apart from it's little bretheren. It's evident that the XPR's topology and construction features (toroid, filter capacitance, output transistors, etc.)is mostly responsible for that. Many have commented in the past that even the discontinued MPS series amps were a step up from the UPA (and X) series amps in sound quality. I just thought it would be neat if the features that sets the XPR apart could "trickle down " into maybe a 200 watt XPR ( lite) version or even on to the next generation of X series amps. Of course, that would mean that they would have to upgrade the entire XPR line upward to even a higher performance level ( scary thought). Maybe the collaboration with Bob Carver will bear fruit in further developing Emotiva's solid state amplifier lines. Don't get me wrong - everyone loves horsepower and having 400 watts (+3dB) available for HT is nice but I could do ok with half that. Just sayin'.............. I hear you, but from a business point of view this would make no sense. Unless you think paying $1500 for it would be something you would do. How many do you think would sell when the xps-5v2 is at $999? |
|
|
|
Post by ocezam on Jul 17, 2013 15:29:17 GMT -5
I got a chance to extensinely demo a XPR-5 and I was completely blown away by the sound quality of the amp compared to the XPA-5 (which I used to own). It would really be nice if the Emotiva folks built a lower powered version of it - say 200w/ch. I simply don't have a need for 400w/ch. in my theater. I really love what they have done with the Reference series amplifier topology. You are getting way to hung up on Watts Per Channel, but doing it in the reverse way most people do. You like the XPR. In fact you were "Completely blown away" but you don't need 400 watts, only 200. SO WHAT?! It's 3 decibels. Hardly a waste. In fact, I'd argue that part of what you were "blown away" with, was the inherent dynamics of all of the headroom in the XPR. Just buy the thing and enjoy! Are you really looking for lower power or just lower cost? What if a 200WPC version costs more? Times two! It's possible this fictitious amp couldn't be brought to market any cheaper. ... |
|
|
|
Post by springright on Aug 6, 2013 20:12:22 GMT -5
No need for this debate....
They just put the Sherborn PA7-350 up for $999.
|
|
|
|
Post by chicagorspec on Aug 6, 2013 20:41:02 GMT -5
...and it's sold out.
|
|
|
|
Post by springwright on Aug 7, 2013 6:00:19 GMT -5
Not before I got one..........................
|
|
|
|
Post by chicagorspec on Aug 7, 2013 7:15:35 GMT -5
Sweet.
|
|
|
|
Post by blindsay on Aug 14, 2013 7:31:49 GMT -5
Doesnt the XPR require a 20amp breaker though? Not everyone has one of those nor the possability of adding one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Porscheguy on Aug 14, 2013 7:39:56 GMT -5
Doesnt the XPR require a 20amp breaker though? Not everyone has one of those nor the possability of adding one. I'm running everything in my sig on one 15 amp circuit |
|
