Garbulky's XPA-2 + UPA-2 biamp+ USP-1 audition!

[garbulky]

So...guess what's in my house on a loan?
An XPA-2 gen1!
Initial Impressions (vs the UPA-2):
All amps don't sound the same.
This one does get really loud.
This amp is REALLY REALLY heavy! Good God man! It was just today that I mentioned I like my amps big and heavy but dayum! Anybody that paid a sale price on these amps don't have to worry about not getting enough parts for their money. It is SO frigging heavy. My wife and I were struggling with the thing. It weighs a lot more than the AC unit we installed and despite being 70 pounds feels like it's about a 100. I've carried a 70 pound monitor but this thing takes the cake. I think it's the bending of space/time due to its dark matter density that's causing its weight to feel doubled.



Will be updating as I listen some more and let the amp warm up a bit. I have a bunch more impressions but I want to make sure I give it a fair shake before posting them. Right now the main thing the UPA-2 is getting stomped on is sheer brute force. It's a mixed bag. But I like to form impressions slowly and a lot of times initial impressions are deceiving for me.

[garbulky]

1. It sounds better to my ears now after a few hours of staying turned on.
2. It responds significantly quicker than the upa-2.
3. I'm hearing instruments more clearly. Actually heard new instruments in familiar tracks.

[geebo]

Aug 17, 2013 19:20:03 GMT -5 garbulky said:

1. It sounds better to my ears now after a few hours of staying turned on.
2. It responds significantly quicker than the upa-2.
3. I'm hearing instruments more clearly. Actually heard new instruments in familiar tracks.

As good as the UPA-2 is, the XPA-2 is in another league.

[stiehl11]

Aug 17, 2013 19:26:03 GMT -5 geebo said:

Aug 17, 2013 19:20:03 GMT -5 garbulky said:

1. It sounds better to my ears now after a few hours of staying turned on.
2. It responds significantly quicker than the upa-2.
3. I'm hearing instruments more clearly. Actually heard new instruments in familiar tracks.

As good as the UPA-2 is, the XPA-2 is in another league.

I agree. Going to the XPA-2 from the XPA-5 (got it simply to add two more channels) for my mains made a significant change to my ears.

[yves]

I think it's a keeper.

[paintedklown]

Garbulky, it sounds like you are really enjoying the XPA-2. Although I have never heard that particular model, I feel the additional headroom the X series provides over the U series is definitely worth the coin.

[Boomzilla]

Hi Garbulky -

I also have a pair of "biwire" cables that you're welcome to try. That would allow you to separate the woofer and tweeter sections of your speakers but using the same amplifier. The cables have ONE banana plug per wire that goes into the amplifier and TWO banana plugs for the speaker end. After removing the crossover jumpers, you connect one plug each to the woofer & tweeter. This isn't true "bi amplification," but it does seem to sound different than having the jumpers on the speakers.

Boomzilla

[garbulky]

Aug 17, 2013 21:01:59 GMT -5 paintedklown said:

Garbulky, it sounds like you are really enjoying the XPA-2. Although I have never heard that particular model, I feel the additional headroom the X series provides over the U series is definitely worth the coin.

So I hate to post this as I have a feeling in a bit I'm going to regret saying this as I do a nearly predictable 180.

The positives. The XPA-2 is very quick. It almost feels like my music is on fast foward as if it's playing too fast
I guess this effect is called smearing? On the upa-2 there is a tendency to smear the sounds into a pleasant lush. The XPA-2 is able to simply play instruments quicker even if they are of relatively low power that a upa-2 can handle with ease.
Maybe this has to do with the tons of capacitance wired in that series or parralel way to get you an equivalent of "only" 45000 but is actually a ton more.

It doesn't run out of steam. Whatever is there comes out and comes out fast.
I have noticed more detail.

The cons:
Well right now, I keep having the urge to plug my upa-2 back in. The two amps simply have two different sounds.

When I plugged it in. The XPA-2 sounded "solid-state" whatever that means while the upa-2 sounds musical. The XPA-2 sounded more artificial. I guess this is the conundrum where the upa-1 was described as musical and the xpa-2 was described as a brute power house. That's the best way I can see to describe it. The XPA-2 does reveal more detail but it almost feels like it has a different eq.
Initially when I plugged it in, I instantly heard a bump in mid-bass and a very strident almost strained sound. The music wasn't laid back and sort of more in your face. Also I heard what I assumed to be either room or cabinet colorations from my speakers. It's a mid-range sound that wasn't there before with the upa-2.
I also realized I was playing them much louder than usual and it took me a long time to turn the sound down to what I listened to with the upa-2. I kept thinking that's the volume I usually listen to and then realized I was wrong.
It's really in the immersive soundstage. The UPA-2 though not for lacking in treble extension etc has a sweeter more laid back sound which can immerse you in the sound. Maybe the imemrsion comes from having to strain a bit harder to hear the sounds. I don't know

Moving on:
Now the thing is pretty darn warmed up if I do say so myself by touching it, this thing runs much hotter than the upa-2. I've given it plenty of ventillation but I can't imagine people stacking these large amps on top of each other or on a carpet. Asking for failure IMO.

Now that it is warmed up, the sound is no longer as bad as I mentioned it in the cons. But whatever the difference, I guess I find myself liking the upa-2 for its sound despite it not being as quick or as transparent. Did Emotiva insert a slight bump in certain frequencies to give the impression of better bass/power to people upgrading? How should I know. Maybe it's just a side effect of tons of power.

Currently the music sound like they are coming from a pair of speakers. Nobody would accuse the sound of not being clear but it lacks the "magic".

So a few thoughts for now:
Since the sound IS different.
1. It may be highlighting that my room is simply too small for my speakers as B mentioned before.
2. I haven't re-adjusted my speakers. This may be honestly the chief culprit for an electronic sound rather than a musical sound. A different sound needs more speaker adjustment. Right now the treble sounds "bright" and sounds like axiom tweeters are a bit on the harsh side. At low volumes the sound isn't as immersive as the upa-2. There is a bit more lack of bass. It also could be that my passive pre-amp is turned all the way to zero. It also has a long wire which I found does attenuate the bass in the upa-2 to produce a sweeter and signifcantly better sound. Maybe this is no longer needed and the attenuation in bass is showing up more as a negative.
More experiments needed.
3. The amp sounds better today than yesterday. So it may simply needed some time.
4. My ears may have simply needed some time.

So all is not lost. I feel I need to spend lots more time with these to really figure them out. So it is a mixed bag. It does sound better in some areas but in terms of soundstage, musicality and depth it seems to be a step back to the upa-2. Makes no sense but what the hey. I've been known to change my mind quite a bit over the course of weeks of experimentation.

[paintedklown]

Aug 18, 2013 11:59:04 GMT -5 garbulky said:

The positives. The XPA-2 is very quick. It almost feels like my music is on fast foward as if it's playing too fast
I guess this effect is called smearing? On the upa-2 there is a tendency to smear the sounds into a pleasant lush. The XPA-2 is able to simply play instruments quicker even if they are of relatively low power that a upa-2 can handle with ease.

I find it interesting that you mention this phenomenon, as I have yet to see anyone else say the same. I too experienced this same thing when I moved to Emo amps from my old Kenwood receiver. It was especially apparent when playing bass heavy music (Black Eyed Peas "Imma Be" instantly springs to mind).

At first, it seemed it was playing faster than what I was previously used to, but I knew that was simply not the case. Like you, I just assumed that I was hearing everything without any smearing when moving to large external amps. It can be a little "odd" sounding at first, but you get used to it. Additionally, the bass will have more definition and power at all volume levels. Good attributes IMO.

As for the sound of your tweeters, this is the same battle I have been having with my B&Ws since moving to external amps as well. Part of my problem (I'm sure) is never having set up in a treated room, and currently I am in a room that I KNOW is way too small for my towers to be in, also not treated.

Another reason for this increased sense of stridency could also be because the XPA-2 is more revealing than the UPA-2 (the extra headroom allows for this IMO), and therefore lets you know that some source material just doesn't sound very flattering. Not sure on this one, though, so I am just "brainstorming" here.

As you mentioned, try playing around with speaker placement and see if that nets you any joy. You also mentioned that you are playing at higher volume levels than you did with the UPA-2 (easy to do with big amps), perhaps the higher volume levels could be pushing your ears to their limit as well? I know that sounds like a silly notion, but when your amps can get loud while remaining clean, it's easy to play at "ear bleed" levels without even realizing that you are doing it. I know with some of my own long/loud listening sessions, that my ears would literally begin to hurt (same feeling as an earache) after a while, and I knew then I was too loud and needed to take a break for a bit.

Have fun with your continued listening session, and please report back your thoughts as you spend more time with the XPA-2. In the end, if you find yourself liking your UPA-2 more than the XPA-2 (for whatever/any reason), there is nothing wrong with that. Audio nirvana is a different path, AND a different goal for everyone...that's why there is more than one amplifier available from each company.

[stiehl11]

Since I've had my XPA-2 paired with my PC-9 speakers I've had two musicians listen to my system (each have day jobs for the insurance, but make as much money on the weekends playing gigs). Both of them have said that, short of being there, my system sounds pretty close. One is so impressed by what he heard he is coming to Emofest to check out all the Emotiva products. I have a feeling that he's going to leave with some gear because he's driving rather than flying.

I will say that the UPA-2 and the XPA-2 have two distinct and different sonic signatures that, to a person who listens to their system every day and knows every nuance to it, is night and day different (real world, just sitting down to listen to them in an unfamiliar room, unfamiliar speakers, and unfamiliar music not as much). If the amps sounded the same, and that's all that was changed, then there would be nothing for your ears to adjust to. When you're at Emofest this year, pick up the XPA-2 amp board and the UPA-2 (now XPA-200) amp board and count the output channels and look at how different they are from one another (not just size). Some of that difference is to handle the power difference between the two, but even that can affect the sonic signature of an amp.

[garbulky]

Aug 18, 2013 13:20:05 GMT -5 paintedklown said:

Aug 18, 2013 11:59:04 GMT -5 garbulky said:

The positives. The XPA-2 is very quick. It almost feels like my music is on fast foward as if it's playing too fast
I guess this effect is called smearing? On the upa-2 there is a tendency to smear the sounds into a pleasant lush. The XPA-2 is able to simply play instruments quicker even if they are of relatively low power that a upa-2 can handle with ease.

I find it interesting that you mention this phenomenon, as I have yet to see anyone else say the same. I too experienced this same thing when I moved to Emo amps from my old Kenwood receiver. It was especially apparent when playing bass heavy music (Black Eyed Peas "Imma Be" instantly springs to mind).

At first, it seemed it was playing faster than what I was previously used to, but I knew that was simply not the case. Like you, I just assumed that I was hearing everything without any smearing when moving to large external amps. It can be a little "odd" sounding at first, but you get used to it. Additionally, the bass will have more definition and power at all volume levels. Good attributes IMO.

As for the sound of your tweeters, this is the same battle I have been having with my B&Ws since moving to external amps as well. Part of my problem (I'm sure) is never having set up in a treated room, and currently I am in a room that I KNOW is way too small for my towers to be in, also not treated.

Another reason for this increased sense of stridency could also be because the XPA-2 is more revealing than the UPA-2 (the extra headroom allows for this IMO), and therefore lets you know that some source material just doesn't sound very flattering. Not sure on this one, though, so I am just "brainstorming" here.

As you mentioned, try playing around with speaker placement and see if that nets you any joy. You also mentioned that you are playing at higher volume levels than you did with the UPA-2 (easy to do with big amps), perhaps the higher volume levels could be pushing your ears to their limit as well? I know that sounds like a silly notion, but when your amps can get loud while remaining clean, it's easy to play at "ear bleed" levels without even realizing that you are doing it. I know with some of my own long/loud listening sessions, that my ears would literally begin to hurt (same feeling as an earache) after a while, and I knew then I was too loud and needed to take a break for a bit.

Have fun with your continued listening session, and please report back your thoughts as you spend more time with the XPA-2. In the end, if you find yourself liking your UPA-2 more than the XPA-2 (for whatever/any reason), there is nothing wrong with that. Audio nirvana is a different path, AND a different goal for everyone...that's why there is more than one amplifier available from each company.

Thanks. I think headroom may be over simplifying things. Things are quicker even in things requiring a tiny fraction of a watt. It's like the thing can react much faster. Maybe it's takes more watts to be quicker - no idea.
Also, I think my cables may be affecting things - i have a passive pre-amp which is sensitive to cables. Got to play around with stuff.

Aug 18, 2013 13:42:11 GMT -5 stiehl11 said:

Since I've had my XPA-2 paired with my PC-9 speakers I've had two musicians listen to my system (each have day jobs for the insurance, but make as much money on the weekends playing gigs). Both of them have said that, short of being there, my system sounds pretty close. One is so impressed by what he heard he is coming to Emofest to check out all the Emotiva products. I have a feeling that he's going to leave with some gear because he's driving rather than flying.

I will say that the UPA-2 and the XPA-2 have two distinct and different sonic signatures that, to a person who listens to their system every day and knows every nuance to it, is night and day different (real world, just sitting down to listen to them in an unfamiliar room, unfamiliar speakers, and unfamiliar music not as much). If the amps sounded the same, and that's all that was changed, then there would be nothing for your ears to adjust to. When you're at Emofest this year, pick up the XPA-2 amp board and the UPA-2 (now XPA-200) amp board and count the output channels and look at how different they are from one another (not just size). Some of that difference is to handle the power difference between the two, but even that can affect the sonic signature of an amp.

I did wonder about the presence of more output devices how well that would uh synchronize things?

In case anybody gets the wrong idea, I'm not saying these amps are BAD. Far from it. My speakers have never been "quicker". I think I'm still figuring things out. For instance the passive pre-amp uses a 150k ohm attenuator which may be a bit high if the XPA-2 and the UPA-2 have different input impedances.
Also my ears have been tuned to the upa-2's sound signature as being "good" so it may require a bit of "de-tuning"

[geebo]

Aug 18, 2013 16:49:26 GMT -5 garbulky said:

Aug 18, 2013 13:20:05 GMT -5 paintedklown said:

I find it interesting that you mention this phenomenon, as I have yet to see anyone else say the same. I too experienced this same thing when I moved to Emo amps from my old Kenwood receiver. It was especially apparent when playing bass heavy music (Black Eyed Peas "Imma Be" instantly springs to mind).

At first, it seemed it was playing faster than what I was previously used to, but I knew that was simply not the case. Like you, I just assumed that I was hearing everything without any smearing when moving to large external amps. It can be a little "odd" sounding at first, but you get used to it. Additionally, the bass will have more definition and power at all volume levels. Good attributes IMO.

As for the sound of your tweeters, this is the same battle I have been having with my B&Ws since moving to external amps as well. Part of my problem (I'm sure) is never having set up in a treated room, and currently I am in a room that I KNOW is way too small for my towers to be in, also not treated.

Another reason for this increased sense of stridency could also be because the XPA-2 is more revealing than the UPA-2 (the extra headroom allows for this IMO), and therefore lets you know that some source material just doesn't sound very flattering. Not sure on this one, though, so I am just "brainstorming" here.

As you mentioned, try playing around with speaker placement and see if that nets you any joy. You also mentioned that you are playing at higher volume levels than you did with the UPA-2 (easy to do with big amps), perhaps the higher volume levels could be pushing your ears to their limit as well? I know that sounds like a silly notion, but when your amps can get loud while remaining clean, it's easy to play at "ear bleed" levels without even realizing that you are doing it. I know with some of my own long/loud listening sessions, that my ears would literally begin to hurt (same feeling as an earache) after a while, and I knew then I was too loud and needed to take a break for a bit.

Have fun with your continued listening session, and please report back your thoughts as you spend more time with the XPA-2. In the end, if you find yourself liking your UPA-2 more than the XPA-2 (for whatever/any reason), there is nothing wrong with that. Audio nirvana is a different path, AND a different goal for everyone...that's why there is more than one amplifier available from each company.

Thanks. I think headroom may be over simplifying things. Things are quicker even in things requiring a tiny fraction of a watt. It's like the thing can react much faster. Maybe it's takes more watts to be quicker - no idea.
Also, I think my cables may be affecting things - i have a passive pre-amp which is sensitive to cables. Got to play around with stuff.

Quicker is one of the ways I would describe it, too. Wonderful transients on things like the piano key strikes and guitar string plucks. Drum beats. More impact. Just more real sounding overall. I much prefer it.

[garbulky]

Can anybody enlighten me as to the difference in the speaker binding posts vs the UPA-2. The UPA-2 has what looks like solid colored plastic posts while the XPA-2 has these transparent plastic connectors.

[stiehl11]

They're nicer and, likely, better binding post. I've had no concerns with either on my amps.

[Boomzilla]

If you want to try a real preamp, juss ax. I have two sitting on the shelf doing nothing for now.

The USP-1 is a VERY fine machine.

The older Crown IC-150 is probably going to do duty as the PA system preamp.

For now, my Jolida tube DAC and the volume pots on my Crown amps allow me to use the digital volume on iTunes with no significant (that I can tell) drop in quality.

Also, I'm about to throw a fire sale on speaker wires on the Emporium. If you want first choice, let me know.

[Golden Ear]

Interesting indeed that I thought XPA-2 is just more power, dynamic and retain same sound quality of UPA-2. You have a good ear garbulky and this is the reason why I enjoy this hobby. When I purchase bower wilkins many months ago, it did surprise me how uncolored the midrange and sparkling high. My long time speakers were polk lsi produce everything smoothly and some of you may call it dark sound. You can listen to it all day without fatigue but with everything in life there is always a trade off. The cymbal and brushes on Polk sound smooth but B&W put those cymbal and brushes close to live performance.

[garbulky]

I like to pretend I have a good ear but I do not. My ears get clogged up frequently due to allergies. But I am very particular about my sound. But when they are not clogged then they are able to hear some reasonably high frequencies. Was it around 15 or 17 khz? I forget.

So a few promising updates. I switched out my interconnect on the passive pre-amp to a shorter wire and the sound is a bit more balanced. Earlier I felt the treble was a bit harsh. It's not perfect yet but it's closer.
Also it appears that the travel of my passive pre-amp has a lot to do with the balance for the xpa-2 though not so much for the upa-2 that I noticed. Right now most of my lsitening with 80 on the upa-2 means that my passive pre-amp is probably at around the first notch or I guess 7 or 8 oclock. My UPA-2 had a neat knob where you could adjust the gain down on the back of it which allowed me to turn the passive pre-amp higher. So maybe that has something to do with affectng it too.
I guess I just need to try out my friend's USP-1. Well if the pursuit of great audio insists, I must ....

Next steps are....Balanced cables!
Speaker positioning!
The excitement! Gentleman hold onto the seat of your PANTS!!!
(Not).

[creimes]

I have noticed more power to a reasonable level can and will control the speaker cone better(Faster), so maybe that's what you are noticing, I've only really noticed that once when I moved from my Yamaha receiver to my first buy into separates my UPA-1's.

Chad

[repeetavx]

I'm looking forward to your impression of using balanced cables. I don't want to influence what you hear, but I think you may hear a difference in the "bass bump".

[deltadube]

Aug 18, 2013 18:58:57 GMT -5 garbulky said:

I like to pretend I have a good ear but I do not. My ears get clogged up frequently due to allergies. But I am very particular about my sound. But when they are not clogged then they are able to hear some reasonably high frequencies. Was it around 15 or 17 khz? I forget.

So a few promising updates. I switched out my interconnect on the passive pre-amp to a shorter wire and the sound is a bit more balanced. Earlier I felt the treble was a bit harsh. It's not perfect yet but it's closer.
Also it appears that the travel of my passive pre-amp has a lot to do with the balance for the xpa-2 though not so much for the upa-2 that I noticed. Right now most of my lsitening with 80 on the upa-2 means that my passive pre-amp is probably at around the first notch or I guess 7 or 8 oclock. My UPA-2 had a neat knob where you could adjust the gain down on the back of it which allowed me to turn the passive pre-amp higher. So maybe that has something to do with affectng it too.
I guess I just need to try out my friend's USP-1. Well if the pursuit of great audio insists, I must ....

Next steps are....Balanced cables!
Speaker positioning!
The excitement! Gentleman hold onto the seat of your PANTS!!!
(Not).

time to move up to the mono blocks Garbulky!