|
|
Post by pedrocols on Aug 18, 2013 21:54:44 GMT -5
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). Personally I don't think balanced cable will make an improvement. At least that was my experience with UPA-1 amps and balanced cables. |
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Aug 19, 2013 12:01:35 GMT -5
A typical "passive preamp" is basically a potentiometer - a passive voltage divider (except a certain few very expensive ones that use an autotransformer). As such, it has a rather high output impedance - which means several things: 1) Where you end up setting it will depend on the input impedance of your power amplifier. This isn't a problem per-se, but the input impedances of various power amps vary pretty widely (because powered preamps don't especially care), so you will end up with different volume settings. These will also be different between different "passive preamps" on the same power amp because each uses different values for its voltage dividers. 2) The high output impedance means that you will get a rolled-off high end due to the capacitance of your interconnect cables (the ones between the "passive preamp" and the power amp). If you're careful, and use short interconnects, with relatively low capacitance, this won't be a problem. However, if you use long interconnects, or ones with a lot of capacitance, you will notice a rolled-off high end (which some people like to refer to as "smooth"). How sensitive your is will, again, depend on the resistance value the manufacturer has chosen to use. (You may even find really strange interconnects with excess inductance that produce even more "interesting" results.) 3) The high output impedance ALSO means that the output will be very sensitive to hum pickup and cable routing. Your interconnects must also be well shielded (and, again, short) to prevent this. 4) Because the output impedance changes depending on where you set the volume, all of the things I mentioned will VARY depending on where you set the volume. (You might, for example, get more high frequency rolloff at the middle settings and less at very high or very low settings  ) Incidentally, those few passive preamps that use tapped transformers are even more sensitive to interconnects; the transformer can interact with cable inductance and capacitance to produce rolloff of upper or lower frequencies, or even peaks in the audio frequency band due to resonances and interactions between them. 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). Personally I don't think balanced cable will make an improvement. At least that was my experience with UPA-1 amps and balanced cables. |
|
Lonnie
Emo Staff
admin
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain
Posts: 6,999
|
Post by Lonnie on Aug 19, 2013 12:42:58 GMT -5
Just a couple of thoughts here on the quickness of the amp and how we perceive what we are hearing.
The XPA amplifiers are indeed faster and by that I mean the slew rate is much higher than the UPA amplifiers. Slew rate is a fancy term for 0 to 60 or in reality 0 to full on. So you are correct, they are faster in their response time which minimizes slewing of the sine wave. Now what you get out of this is basically the signal, whatever it is, is reproduced with absolute accuracy. That is to say the pluck of a string has a hard edge to it, a trumpet makes you wince (if the volume is loud enough) and a bow of a violin brushing across the strings actually has metallic sound the strings make when played. So what you are hearing is the true artifacts of the music as they would he heard if you were standing in front of the instrument as it was being played live. The XPA series will not only reproduce the fundamental frequencies, but all the associated harmonics and detail associated with it and as such, you don't just hear the music, you hear everything. A lot of amplifiers are slow in response and tend to smooth out these hard edges, but the XPA series was designed from the start to be as true to life as possible and reproduce every nuance in the music.
Now that doesn't mean it is right for everyone. I personally like a really fast amp. To me there is nothing more satisfying than listening to a piece of music that is so realistic it actually sucks you in and you hear every detail. Though for others, they might prefer to have things smoothed out a bit, which is OK as well. It all comes down to personal taste and what you want your system to sound like.
Lonnie
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 19, 2013 13:00:06 GMT -5
Just a couple of thoughts here on the quickness of the amp and how we perceive what we are hearing. The XPA amplifiers are indeed faster and by that I mean the slew rate is much higher than the UPA amplifiers. Slew rate is a fancy term for 0 to 60 or in reality 0 to full on. So you are correct, they are faster in their response time which minimizes slewing of the sine wave. Now what you get out of this is basically the signal, whatever it is, is reproduced with absolute accuracy. That is to say the pluck of a string has a hard edge to it, a trumpet makes you wince (if the volume is loud enough) and a bow of a violin brushing across the strings actually has metallic sound the strings make when played. So what you are hearing is the true artifacts of the music as they would he heard if you were standing in front of the instrument as it was being played live. The XPA series will not only reproduce the fundamental frequencies, but all the associated harmonics and detail associated with it and as such, you don't just hear the music, you hear everything. A lot of amplifiers are slow in response and tend to smooth out these hard edges, but the XPA series was designed from the start to be as true to life as possible and reproduce every nuance in the music. Now that doesn't mean it is right for everyone. I personally like a really fast amp. To me there is nothing more satisfying than listening to a piece of music that is so realistic it actually sucks you in and you hear every detail. Though for others, they might prefer to have things smoothed out a bit, which is OK as well. It all comes down to personal taste and what you want your system to sound like. Lonnie Lonnie, I want to tell you what a real pleasure it is for the chief designer of the amp I am trying out to give me feedback while I am trying them out. Just great. Thank you for the information on the slew rate. A typical "passive preamp" is basically a potentiometer - a passive voltage divider (except a certain few very expensive ones that use an autotransformer). As such, it has a rather high output impedance - which means several things: [/quote] Thanks you very much your info on passive's was definitely helpful. I suspect that the slightly tilted up FR is due to some interaction here. I shall try direct to the XDA-1 to see if there's a change. |
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Aug 19, 2013 13:57:31 GMT -5
Just a couple of thoughts here on the quickness of the amp and how we perceive what we are hearing. The XPA amplifiers are indeed faster and by that I mean the slew rate is much higher than the UPA amplifiers. Slew rate is a fancy term for 0 to 60 or in reality 0 to full on. So you are correct, they are faster in their response time which minimizes slewing of the sine wave. Now what you get out of this is basically the signal, whatever it is, is reproduced with absolute accuracy. That is to say the pluck of a string has a hard edge to it, a trumpet makes you wince (if the volume is loud enough) and a bow of a violin brushing across the strings actually has metallic sound the strings make when played. So what you are hearing is the true artifacts of the music as they would he heard if you were standing in front of the instrument as it was being played live. The XPA series will not only reproduce the fundamental frequencies, but all the associated harmonics and detail associated with it and as such, you don't just hear the music, you hear everything. A lot of amplifiers are slow in response and tend to smooth out these hard edges, but the XPA series was designed from the start to be as true to life as possible and reproduce every nuance in the music. Now that doesn't mean it is right for everyone. I personally like a really fast amp. To me there is nothing more satisfying than listening to a piece of music that is so realistic it actually sucks you in and you hear every detail. Though for others, they might prefer to have things smoothed out a bit, which is OK as well. It all comes down to personal taste and what you want your system to sound like. Lonnie This makes a lot of sense to me. I have mentioned before how I had attend live concerts and find the music (or sound) harsh and unbearable to listen to at times. People complain sometimes about how "unmusical" one amp sounds but you should realize that in general not every musical note is going to be pleasant to your ears. I also would like to add that if what we are trying to do at home is to replicate a live performance, we should be prepared for bad performers. So guess how the bad performances are going to sound like.....exactly is going to sound like s...on't blame the amp, blame the performer  |
|
|
|
Post by Golden Ear on Aug 19, 2013 14:25:35 GMT -5
Just a couple of thoughts here on the quickness of the amp and how we perceive what we are hearing. The XPA amplifiers are indeed faster and by that I mean the slew rate is much higher than the UPA amplifiers. Slew rate is a fancy term for 0 to 60 or in reality 0 to full on. So you are correct, they are faster in their response time which minimizes slewing of the sine wave. Now what you get out of this is basically the signal, whatever it is, is reproduced with absolute accuracy. That is to say the pluck of a string has a hard edge to it, a trumpet makes you wince (if the volume is loud enough) and a bow of a violin brushing across the strings actually has metallic sound the strings make when played. So what you are hearing is the true artifacts of the music as they would he heard if you were standing in front of the instrument as it was being played live. The XPA series will not only reproduce the fundamental frequencies, but all the associated harmonics and detail associated with it and as such, you don't just hear the music, you hear everything. A lot of amplifiers are slow in response and tend to smooth out these hard edges, but the XPA series was designed from the start to be as true to life as possible and reproduce every nuance in the music. Now that doesn't mean it is right for everyone. I personally like a really fast amp. To me there is nothing more satisfying than listening to a piece of music that is so realistic it actually sucks you in and you hear every detail. Though for others, they might prefer to have things smoothed out a bit, which is OK as well. It all comes down to personal taste and what you want your system to sound like. Lonnie This makes a lot of sense to me. I have mentioned before how I had attend live concerts and find the music (or sound) harsh and unbearable to listen to at times. People complain sometimes about how "unmusical" one amp sounds but you should realize that in general not every musical note is going to be pleasant to your ears. I also would like to add that if what we are trying to do at home is to replicate a live performance, we should be prepared for bad performers. So guess how the bad performances are going to sound like.....exactly is going to sound like s...on't blame the amp, blame the performer There many type of live concert depending on the venue but if you have been inside of world class concert halls such as Amsterdam, Boston Symphony Hall, Royal Albert Hall and listen to a live classical music it put high end gear to shame. |
|
|
|
Post by geebo on Aug 19, 2013 14:35:08 GMT -5
Just a couple of thoughts here on the quickness of the amp and how we perceive what we are hearing. The XPA amplifiers are indeed faster and by that I mean the slew rate is much higher than the UPA amplifiers. Slew rate is a fancy term for 0 to 60 or in reality 0 to full on. So you are correct, they are faster in their response time which minimizes slewing of the sine wave. Now what you get out of this is basically the signal, whatever it is, is reproduced with absolute accuracy. That is to say the pluck of a string has a hard edge to it, a trumpet makes you wince (if the volume is loud enough) and a bow of a violin brushing across the strings actually has metallic sound the strings make when played. So what you are hearing is the true artifacts of the music as they would he heard if you were standing in front of the instrument as it was being played live. The XPA series will not only reproduce the fundamental frequencies, but all the associated harmonics and detail associated with it and as such, you don't just hear the music, you hear everything. A lot of amplifiers are slow in response and tend to smooth out these hard edges, but the XPA series was designed from the start to be as true to life as possible and reproduce every nuance in the music. Now that doesn't mean it is right for everyone. I personally like a really fast amp. To me there is nothing more satisfying than listening to a piece of music that is so realistic it actually sucks you in and you hear every detail. Though for others, they might prefer to have things smoothed out a bit, which is OK as well. It all comes down to personal taste and what you want your system to sound like. Lonnie I, too, prefer a fast amp. That's one of the things that really struck me when I first got my XPA-5 and and it hooked me immediately. And the XPA-2 seems to be even better in that regard. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Aug 19, 2013 15:22:30 GMT -5
Try this on for size..... The actual speed of the music, of course, isn't going to change; if you put an oscilloscope on it you will find that the pitch and the number of milliseconds between notes obviously has NOT changed, and the song doesn't end some nfraction of a second sooner with a different amplifier. As has already been noted, though, by reducing or eliminating smearing, you end up with things sounding faster. A large part of that "smearing" is what happens when the speaker starts moving, then continues to move after it should have stopped, because the amp is unable to control it well enough. A more powerful amplifier with greater damping and the power necessary to back it up is better able to control the movement of the speaker; this is what "reduces smearing". And, with less time smearing, the notes sound "sharper and more concise" which makes the tune seem to "move along more precisely"... which our brains sort of interpret as "faster". It is also possible that you are noticing that your ears are responding differently - because you can play the more powerful amp louder before it even hints at distortion. 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. 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" |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2013 15:36:05 GMT -5
Try this on for size..... The actual speed of the music, of course, isn't going to change; if you put an oscilloscope on it you will find that the pitch and the number of milliseconds between notes obviously has NOT changed, and the song doesn't end some nfraction of a second sooner with a different amplifier. As has already been noted, though, by reducing or eliminating smearing, you end up with things sounding faster. A large part of that "smearing" is what happens when the speaker starts moving, then continues to move after it should have stopped, because the amp is unable to control it well enough. A more powerful amplifier with greater damping and the power necessary to back it up is better able to control the movement of the speaker; this is what "reduces smearing". And, with less time smearing, the notes sound "sharper and more concise" which makes the tune seem to "move along more precisely"... which our brains sort of interpret as "faster". It is also possible that you are noticing that your ears are responding differently - because you can play the more powerful amp louder before it even hints at distortion. 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. 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" This is exactly what i thought was happening and why so many people say they hear things in recordings they never heard before ( me included) when moving to very powerful separates. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 19, 2013 22:22:23 GMT -5
So thanks to a very kind friend, I have in my possession on loan a USP-1.
I haven't really listened to it yet past it works. But right now it appears to not have the problem I had with the low bass being too low and the treble being too harsh. It feels a bit more balanced - all from listening to about 2 minutes of audio. Stay tuned for more serious listening.
Edit: Woah there's a whooooole lot of bass. S/O calls from the other room, "wow I can feel that from over here" on the drum beat on toucha touch me on rocky horror picture show".
|
|
|
|
Post by deltadube on Aug 19, 2013 23:31:44 GMT -5
So thanks to a very kind friend, I have in my possession on loan a USP-1. I haven't really listened to it yet past it works. But right now it appears to not have the problem I had with the low bass being too low and the treble being too harsh. It feels a bit more balanced - all from listening to about 2 minutes of audio. Stay tuned for more serious listening. Edit: Woah there's a whooooole lot of bass. S/O calls from the other room, "wow I can feel that from over here" on the drum beat on toucha touch me on rocky horror picture show". Nice friend Garbulky... didnt even let you have an xsp 1 i got a feeling your going to have to do some upgrading once or if you send the stuff back.. maybe you will keep it... cheers.. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 19, 2013 23:54:36 GMT -5
So thanks to a very kind friend, I have in my possession on loan a USP-1. I haven't really listened to it yet past it works. But right now it appears to not have the problem I had with the low bass being too low and the treble being too harsh. It feels a bit more balanced - all from listening to about 2 minutes of audio. Stay tuned for more serious listening. Edit: Woah there's a whooooole lot of bass. S/O calls from the other room, "wow I can feel that from over here" on the drum beat on toucha touch me on rocky horror picture show". Nice friend Garbulky... didnt even let you have an xsp 1 i got a feeling your going to have to do some upgrading once or if you send the stuff back.. maybe you will keep it... cheers.. Delta: The XPA-2 and USP-1 isn't mine. It's on a loan. My dream monoblocks are the XPA-1 Gen 2 with its 60 watts of class A goodness But purchasing stuff will have to wait for quite some time for me. Some more updates. The USP-1 has only had a few hours warm up time. With that in mind, let's go onto more very initial impressions. It's obvious that I need to spend a lot more time with this unit before I give more judgment. It's not a unit you can just judge in a day. It simply isn't. It has audible pros and cons. Instead of talking about cons (one knows how I like to change my mind), let's talk about pros! It has allowed me to hear things that I couldn't hear before, namely in the bass department. For instance on puff the magic dragon BBC live performance of Peter Paul and Mary, I could hear the double bass guitarist plucking clearly where before I could hear the resonance of the bass and its reverberations in the hall but not the individual pluck. It's also a very powerful output device. It has no problem with pushing it out when previous devices would falter, it takes control - mainly of the bass and pumps it out with confidence. When a female singer sings loud, well it gives it LOUD. Perhaps a little too loudly but never call this thing shy. On a more humurous note: my wife found the motorized volume control endlessly amusing and had lots of questions about it as she played with it. She also really liked that bass. She came into the living room with an interested look and simply asked me to play stuff and explain to her what the unit does. That doesn't happen often so there's something to be said about that! Let's see how it plays out. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 20, 2013 4:09:20 GMT -5
I thought it would be neat to show what is really something audio wise coming together.  Action snap!  Equipment: Asus xonar essence ST coax out to XDA-1 USP-1 pre-amp Amps (bi amplified - not monoblocked) XPA-2 (bass amp) UPA-2 (Mids and highs) to Axiom M80 V2 with V3 internals. <ahem> Bi-amped baby <ahem!>  So how does it sound? Well, that's a bit tough to say. For I listened to it for several hours with a huuuuuge grin on my face and typed up several pages worth of glowing audiophile reviews. Including a chastiziing of the USP-1's poor left right balance at lower volumes .... until I found out that I had not plugged in the the XPA-2 on one M80 speaker. This means the mid-range and tweeters were working on both speakers but only one set of twin bass drivers was working and only on the right side. But the sound was FANTASTIC! Now with both bass speakers connected, the sound is uh, very different. Haha! I am too tired to go into a full review but I can tell you with one bass speaker unplugged I was in sonic heaven.Oh man......  So since my long bi-amp review is basically completely invalid, allow me share with you some gems I found of observations I made with essentially a quarter of my sound system missing (the left twin bass drivers). Note btw, most of these I'm quoting are negatives and I said a whole bunch of positives pretty much praising the entire system including the usp-1 to the heavens. I'm only showing the negatives as they are pretty funny IMO not because I only had bad things to say about the system - there were lots more positives - just not shown. So keep in mind essentially there is NO bass on one side due to the XPA-2 not being connected... " The BASS Is tighter. Pretty much everything it does is simply tight. " " The mids and highs - are slightly off-center likely due to the amps not being the same and the USP-1 being at essentially the lowest possible volume it's possible to set it at. But no matter, it's GREAT. Not quite as fast with the XPA-2 but simply better sounding to my ears. " "The USP-1 I am still figuring this thing out. " " "So having said that: The USP-1 appears to sound different depending on what equipment I throw at it. " (or you know half a speaker garbulky!) "Warning: audiophile hoo-ha and chocolate truffles ahead. Sorry, I tried but I lack the ability to articulate this in a more relatable fashion. There is a lack of "air" and room ambience. " (But not a lack of HOT air apparently!) "Bi-amped, all these issue goes down significantly where I am absolutely enjoying the sound. And I'm constantly finding new things about it that I like. So like I said, I'm still figuring it out. It also simply sounds better the longer it's left turned on. The amount of dynamics it pulls out of the mid-range is really fun. " (Mid-range indeed garbulky!)The best part is this:
"
The major problem I've had is the volume control's travel. At lower volumes there is a lack of a dead center balance. But turn it down digitally and increase the volume pot higher and the balance returns to normal. "
Followed shortly by: "It sounds better than anything I had before. Listening to Cecilia Barttoli expresing herself on the Maria album is just sublime with the USP-1. " Oh man. I am really cracking myself up. But truth be told, the sound was amazing and better than what I had! Even with the entire left bass section missing. Anyway as for the review. The sound is fine, but <sigh> the bass is a little bit on the heavy side. Probably a side-effect of mixing two different amps with likely slightly different gain structures. I tried putting the UPA-2 on the bass section but quickly found my banana plugs were not going to fit on the XPA-2 so that's out for now. Anything more detailed will have to wait for another day. Hope you all enjoyed the pictures. |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Aug 20, 2013 6:25:07 GMT -5
Hi Garbulky -
A suggestion or two -
Maybe consider putting the passive preamp back on the input of the XPA-2 when bi-amping. That way, you could "tune" the bass to the level of the UPA-2.
Alternately, rather than bi-amp your speakers, why don't you try bi-wiring them from the single XPA-2?
Also, I'm suspecting you'll find that the preamp pretty much does away with your interconnect variables. In my experience, having the USP-1 preamp THOROUGHLY warmed up is necessary to get its best. It sounds extremely thin but boomy for the first 30 minutes to an hour after which it settles down & blooms.
My major problem with the entire bi-amping thing is that variables multiply like rabbits: Long interconnects + short speaker cables or vice versa? Same cables for bass & treble or different? Gain the same for woofers & tweeter or cut one or the other? Same amplifiers for bass & treble or mix & match? The mind boggles!
Keep us posted on the equipment!
Boomzilla
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 20, 2013 7:16:51 GMT -5
Hi Garbulky - A suggestion or two - Maybe consider putting the passive preamp back on the input of the XPA-2 when bi-amping. That way, you could "tune" the bass to the level of the UPA-2. Alternately, rather than bi-amp your speakers, why don't you try bi-wiring them from the single XPA-2? Also, I'm suspecting you'll find that the preamp pretty much does away with your interconnect variables. In my experience, having the USP-1 preamp THOROUGHLY warmed up is necessary to get its best. It sounds extremely thin but boomy for the first 30 minutes to an hour after which it settles down & blooms. My major problem with the entire bi-amping thing is that variables multiply like rabbits: Long interconnects + short speaker cables or vice versa? Same cables for bass & treble or different? Gain the same for woofers & tweeter or cut one or the other? Same amplifiers for bass & treble or mix & match? The mind boggles! Keep us posted on the equipment! Boomzilla That is a smart suggestion. Put the passive pre-amp on the output end for the XPA-2. Huh. Unfortunately I'm pretty much out of interconnects and it is a real chore to put the upa-2 back in. I've run out of banana clips so crammed up against the wall trying to cram bare wire in is no fun After some further listening, that XPA-2 is really a piece of work. Whatever you paid for it is certainly worth it. I listened to Dave Brubeck - Time out take five after thinking about that vinyl you picked up and boy it sounded very good. That drumset was so well positioned and had great impact. Lots of expression. For instance I could see the distance with one drum being close to me than the other within the drum set. You are right about the USP-1 it takes some time to warm up and sound good but when it does it does have a nice touch to it especially with dynamics on the mid-range. Drums sound especially good on it. I've also noticed improved audience clapping etc. |
|
|
|
Post by geebo on Aug 20, 2013 7:17:24 GMT -5
Hi Garbulky - A suggestion or two - Maybe consider putting the passive preamp back on the input of the XPA-2 when bi-amping. That way, you could "tune" the bass to the level of the UPA-2. Alternately, rather than bi-amp your speakers, why don't you try bi-wiring them from the single XPA-2? Also, I'm suspecting you'll find that the preamp pretty much does away with your interconnect variables. In my experience, having the USP-1 preamp THOROUGHLY warmed up is necessary to get its best. It sounds extremely thin but boomy for the first 30 minutes to an hour after which it settles down & blooms. My major problem with the entire bi-amping thing is that variables multiply like rabbits: Long interconnects + short speaker cables or vice versa? Same cables for bass & treble or different? Gain the same for woofers & tweeter or cut one or the other? Same amplifiers for bass & treble or mix & match? The mind boggles! Keep us posted on the equipment! Boomzilla I would also suggest to try the XPA-2 by itself with the USP-1 if you haven't already. I tried bi-amping with my XPA-2 and XPA-5 but found I prefered the sound of the XPA-2 by itself. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 20, 2013 7:21:50 GMT -5
Hi Garbulky - A suggestion or two - Maybe consider putting the passive preamp back on the input of the XPA-2 when bi-amping. That way, you could "tune" the bass to the level of the UPA-2. Alternately, rather than bi-amp your speakers, why don't you try bi-wiring them from the single XPA-2? Also, I'm suspecting you'll find that the preamp pretty much does away with your interconnect variables. In my experience, having the USP-1 preamp THOROUGHLY warmed up is necessary to get its best. It sounds extremely thin but boomy for the first 30 minutes to an hour after which it settles down & blooms. My major problem with the entire bi-amping thing is that variables multiply like rabbits: Long interconnects + short speaker cables or vice versa? Same cables for bass & treble or different? Gain the same for woofers & tweeter or cut one or the other? Same amplifiers for bass & treble or mix & match? The mind boggles! Keep us posted on the equipment! Boomzilla I would also suggest to try the XPA-2 by itself with the USP-1 if you haven't already. I tried bi-amping with my XPA-2 and XPA-5 but found I prefered the sound of the XPA-2 by itself. Hi Geebo, I have been trying it. To be honest, it wasn't until today that the USP-1 and XPA-2 combo really came into its own. It sounds very good now. I keep thinking about the Pre-1 and the XLR outputs and what a deal it must be at $175. Just an outright steal really. |
|
|
|
Post by geebo on Aug 20, 2013 7:31:58 GMT -5
I would also suggest to try the XPA-2 by itself with the USP-1 if you haven't already. I tried bi-amping with my XPA-2 and XPA-5 but found I prefered the sound of the XPA-2 by itself. Hi Geebo, I have been trying it. To be honest, it wasn't until today that the USP-1 and XPA-2 combo really came into its own. It sounds very good now. I keep thinking about the Pre-1 and the XLR outputs and what a deal it must be at $175. Just an outright steal really. I paid $250 for my PRE-1 and it was a steal at that. The USP is basically the same without the XLRs but with bass management. Just connect the XDA to the USP to the XPA and enjoy. You might even try using the XDA as a preamp connected directly to the XPA. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 20, 2013 20:10:36 GMT -5
(XPA-2 connected to the USP-1 to XDA-1 DAC mode only now - no bi-amp) It's obvious that the USP-1 requires its own dedicated section. I didn't think it would as it's "just a volume control." But it does. It's a special piece of equipment. Not perfect but darn musical to me. If anybody is wondering about this pre-amp and whether it is just a volume control, don't wonder. It's worth it for the ability to hear the dynamics of musical performers. It's concentration are very obviously in the mid-range and dynamics, and it does a lot with it. It's the ability to hear musicians perform vs hearing a record. It doesn't have to be perfect because it's good - sort of like tube gear. There's a reason Emotiva still sells it. I'll write a longer review sometime.  USP-1 Love  |
|
|
|
Post by paintedklown on Aug 20, 2013 20:25:25 GMT -5
Great looking room Garbulky. I know you have a lot of suggestions coming at you but I would try XDA-1 (as a dac) into the USP-1 into the XPA-2 and see how that sounds. Either way, I will be looking forward to your full review, with both speakers' subs hooked up. |
|
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. 
) 
