Boomzilla's XPR-2 Review

[Boomzilla]

I looked carefully at all the XPA, XPA-L, & XPR options before deciding. Actually, I looked at the UPA line also.

My goals were:

Reliability
Top sound quality
Quality design & parts
Compact footprint
Price

In that order. My ultimate selection was the XPR-2. The specs recommended it because it had twice the damping factor of the other amps (although KeithL says that high damping factors are not such a big deal, I have my doubts). The parts quality recommended the R series, and the compact footprint recommended the XPR-2 rather than a pair of XPR-1s. I've taken some chiding for not opting for mono blocks, but for my room, I think I made the right choice. Since I run at such low, low volumes compared to most listeners, the ultimate power was less of a factor, and since I'm running ANY of the amps under consideration in their "class-A envelope" at low power, having more Class-A headroom (for me) means just wasted electricity.

That's the thought process that led me to the XPR-2. Despite the logical arguments in its favor, I'd have sent it back in a heartbeat if it didn't perform. IMHO, it does, and audibly better (to me) than my previous XPA-2 and Crown PS-400 amplifiers. There's not a BIG improvement (no "OMG! - Drops mouth open - crosses eyes" response), but there is, to my ears, more refinement, better imaging, better bass control, and more bass extension. Do ANY of the specs show the attributes that I just mentioned? No. And THAT's why we need different specs... But that's another discussion for another day.

If Emotiva didn't have their 30-day return offer, I'd have not bought this amp. As it turns out, though, the return period is academic. This is a keeper..

Boom

[bub]

delete

[bub]

delete

[Boomzilla]

I listened some more last night. With my speakers, the XPR-2 lacks some of the dynamics that the Crown PS-400 had. The XPR-2 gets better dynamics as I turn up the volume, but it isn't the type of amp that once made a visitor to my listening room jump & scream "S..T!" when a transient occurs (that amp was the XPA-2 and a pair of Thiel 1.5 speakers). Initially, I thought that the slight dynamic reticence was an artifact of my Paradigm speakers (and/or the DefTech SM65 speakers that I also tried), but in comparison with the Crown PS-400, the XPR-2 is definitely slightly less dynamic. On speakers that are themselves very dynamic (and I think here of Garbulky's Axiom M80s), I think that the XPR-2 would be a match made in Heaven. With speakers that are by nature already laid-back sounding, not so much.

Note that the flaw (laid back sound) is not one of the amp but rather of the speakers. I think that the Crown PS-400 and the XPA-2 both sound more dynamic than the XPR-2. In fact, I'd rate the amplifiers' dynamics in this order: Crown PS-400 = best by a slight margin; Emotiva XPA-2 = only slightly behind the Crown; XPR-2 = a bit less dynamic than either of the former.

Is this a fair comparison? The Crown loses its dynamics significantly when paired with a low-impedance speaker (4 ohms or less). The XPA-2 & XPR-2 seem the same regardless of impedance. Nevertheless, the XPR-2 is supposed to be run with a 20-ampere power supply. I'm running mine on a 15 amp circuit that has other equipment on it. Is the XPR-2 sagging the supply voltage? At the volumes I'm using, I doubt it, but it's a thought to consider. Another consideration is break-in. My XPA-2 and Crown PS400 are "mature" amps. The XPR-2 is a newborn. Will it get better in the next week or two as parts have time to settle & burn in? In theory, no; in practice, we'll see...

So maybe the XPR-2 is more sensitive than most about speaker matching? THAT's a distinct possibility. To test this theory, I may pick up a used speaker that I know to be dynamic. A "pro audio monitor" might suffice, or a smaller Axiom Audio model. Any Klipsch product would also likely be an option, and they have the benefits of being readily available on the used market and inexpensive. How the XPR-2 mates with a dynamic speaker will tell me more about its nature. Depending on how Dan's new towers sound, they might be a good match as well. Lastly, there's a local dealer trying to dump his last pair of Klipsch Heresy IIIs for less than half of retail and another dealer trying to dump his last pair of PS Barton Synchrony Ones for a similar discount.

If I'm getting back into speaker/amp matching, then I'm probably also getting back into "you might need a subwoofer." I've tried to avoid this, and am still in the mind of avoiding it. If I can find very dynamic, very wide range speakers, then they might be the option I'm looking for. The Tekton Pendragons have been recommended to me again and again, so if I ever get a chance to hear some, I'm eager to do so.

Of my existing speakers, the Paradigm towers are not sufficiently flat enough in frequency response for me and the Definitive Technology SM65 monitors don't go low enough in the bass. Speaker shopping time?

Boomzilla

[garbulky]

PSB synchrony one may be a nice option but I hve no idea how deep it would go. It looks spec'd to be pretty darn low. If you could, try and get the audio dealer to allow you a "trial". But of course you may want to pause to see what emo has to offer. I imagine they will also come out with some serious subwoofers to match. I wouldn't go with the heresey's - I reccomend more modern and less horn. You didn't buy a 2000 watt@ 4ohm amp for nothing! BTW, you must be having the time your life with a 105 an XPR-2 and those big ol paradigms!

[Boomzilla]

Hi Gar -

Yes, the folks at the local "high end saloon" will be happy to let me try the PSBs in my room for a weekend, and they'll deliver them, set them up, & pick them up when I'm done. I've resisted their offer so far because of two reasons. The PSBs are above what I think I "should spend" for speakers (but I may need to review this attitude). The other reason is that I'm going to feel badly if, after all their work, I decide not to buy from them (and I certainly need to review this attitude as well). The same dealer has a used pair of B&W somethings with the diamond tweeter. The speakers, at least in the showroom, don't sound the least bit like B&W speakers - no brightness, no tizz, no lack of brass sound on cymbals. The used speakers are $10K. I may again need to visit & listen in the showroom before I decide if I'm serious enough about either to justify a home audition.

[auxinput]

I have read through a lot of this thread and I figure that I'll give some feedback based on my experiences with the different types of equipment.  Some amps that are weaker (especially Class D amps) may have a variable frequence response rate based on the impedance curve of the speaker.  I read here that your Crown amp loses its dynamics with a 4 ohm speaker.  This is a prime example of this.  I actually own a Crown CTS2000.  When I tried this with my B&W, it actually over-emphasized the highs and put a tube-like overtone on the sound.

A specific example I can give is when you pair a Class D amp (like the Channel Islands) with a hard to drive speaker (like Aerial Acoustics).  What happens is that don't have as much bass control/strength and the highs roll off -- you can also get an artificually inflated midrange texture.  These Emotiva XPA and XPR amps are very strong high current amps which are not impacted as much with speaker impedance curves.  This means that the amp frequency response is more flat and tends to ignore what the speaker impedance is.

Now pairing a very strong high current amp with a bright sounding speaker (like a Focal/JMLab) is probably not a good idea.  The speakers tweeter can get to be too much and too harsh.  I experienced this directly with paring Focal with an Aragon amp.  The tweeters were just out of control.  However, when paired with the Class D, the speaker really sung!! (although, there was still a lack of bass)

Now let's talk about brightness and B&W.  Most brightness issues, in my opinion, are because of metal dome tweeters (titanium or aluminum dome).  The first generation B&W Natilus series (i.e. 800, 802, 803, etc.) used aluminum dome tweeters, which had a resonance frequency of about 22khz.  Even though your music mostly plays under 20khz, as the frequency becomes closer to the resonance it will cause echoes/distortion/boosts because the tweeter will start to flex.  This is what causes the brightness issues. 

The second generation B&W 800 series improved the resonance frequence to about 28khz, but this is still close enough to cause a little imperfection in the tweeter response. 

The new diamond tweeters have a resonance frequency of about 79khz.  Normal music (under 20khz) will never get close enough to the resonance frequency to cause the resonance distortion/brightness.  This is why these new speakers don't sound bright.  An article was written by Accuton (who also developed a diamond tweeter) that describes their experience:  Accuton Diamond Tweeters

During initial listening experience, they thought that the tweeter wasn't working because they couldn't "hear" it.  After re-testing the tweeter response in the lab, they determined that the tweeter was working perfectly.  After critical listening, they realized that all the high frequency content was there, it just was not distorted by the "brightness" effect of normal tweeters. 

I have experienced the same thing with the B&W Diamonds and this is why I'm a B&W convert.  What you get with the Diamonds is a more "real" sound.  In a great system (like with Emotiva amps and an excellent DAC source) the result is something that sounds like someone is really standing their singing/playing instead of something that sounds like a great speaker.  This gets you closer to reality (which is where I want to go with my system).  The B&W speakers do require a really strong high-current amp to drive them to perfection.  A more laid-back amp (like McIntosh) just does not have enough "attack" or impact in my opinion.  I have heard that the McIntosh amps are great for a bright sounding speaker (like the Focals).

Another characteristic of the B&W speakers is that they have an extremely strong midrange.  On some songs or movies, certain vocals can tend to "BLARE".  I believe that this is really the B&W revealing exactly what's on the recording (it's not a real forgiving speaker).  However, the realness of good midrange source (like a 24/192 Norah Jones album) can really put you into Nirvanna.  I suppose it depends if you want a speaker/system that takes the edge of of things and averages all recordings (i.e. it makes everything sound pretty good, whether it's an excellent recording or a bad recording).  I would prefer to have a system that makes those excellent recordings sound transcendent, event thougth the bad recordings will have a pretty poor response.  In a system that "averages" everything, you will never experience the best sound. 

The B&W diamonds have 2 generations already.  The first generation is named like "802D".  The second generation is labeled as "802 Diamond".  The second generation improve portions of the crossover circuit and also added more motors in the tweeter engine.

Of course, I'm publishing my own opinions here.  Everyone is different and may have a different planned outcome for their sound.

[Boomzilla]

Hi auxinput -

I think we agree somewhat on B&W speakers - the only one I've heard that didn't sound tizzy to me was a Diamond model.

I've had excellent results with McIntosh amps on both Klipsch and Thiel speakers (both of which have the potential, with other amps, to be bright). Of those, my Thiel 1.5s and 3.6s sounded great with my Emotiva XPA-2 amp; the Klipsch La Scalas, not so much. I wouldn't take too much away from this experience, though, because I later found that the crossovers in my La Scalas were not performing at factory specs.

I've had no objection to B&W speakers' bass or midrange; only their tweeters have consistently offended me. And, again, the diamond model that I listened to sounded (to my ears) nothing like the previous B&Ws. I've never heard Focal speakers, so I can't comment there.

Just for the record, I have not one but two Crown amplifiers. The first is a conventional class AB amp, the PS-400. This is the amp that provides crisp bass with speakers whose impedance is from 6.5 ohms on up, but gets wooly in the bass when any speaker's impedance drops toward four ohms. My other Crown amplifier is a XLS-1500. This is a class D amplifier. It sounds fine in the bass regardless of impedance (so far as I can tell), but has "soft" treble with every speaker I've tried it with, regardless of the speaker's impedance.

My other amps have been the Emotiva XPA-2, the Emotiva A-100 Mini-X, and now the Emotiva XPR-2.

With my Definitive Technology SM-65 speakers (6.5 ohms), I'd rate the amplifiers' bass control as follows, from best to worst:

Crown PS-400
Emotiva XPR-2
Emotiva XPA-2
Crown XLS-1500 & Mini-X (tie) Note that the XLS-1500 and the Mini-X aren't bad in the bass, per se, but the other amps sound tighter.

With Magnepan 1.6 speakers and/or Paradigm Eclipse BP speakers (both 4 ohms in the bass), I'd rate the amplifiers' bass control as follows, from best to worst:

Emotova XPA-2 & Emotiva XPR-2 (virtual tie)
Crown PS-400 & Crown XLS-1500 (slightly less tight by a small margin)
Emotiva Mini-X (still not too bad, but the other amps sound tighter)

Treble among these amplifiers is totally speaker dependent. I can't hear enough difference to consistently characterize except to say that the Crown PS-400 sounds slightly bright some of the time, the Crown XLS-1500 sounds soft all of the time, and the Emotiva XPR-2 has slightly less dynamics than the other amps.

Take ALL my comments regarding the Emotiva XPR-2 with caution at this point - it's new and I haven't heard it but for a few hours. As it settles in, its sound may change a bit.

Cheers - Boomzilla

[Boomzilla]

Well, on the advice of Lionear, I left my XPR-2 and Oppo BDP-105 on all night last night and took a fresh listen this morning. Those transistors must have lived it up last night, because this morning they're some HAPPY campers!

The imaging (already good) became more precise. Both the width and depth of image improved noticeably. I've yet to try some of the more unusual cuts (Madonna's Q-sound album "The Immaculate Collection," for example) but with "normal" recordings, the change is apparent.

The bass (already good) has become deeper and stronger. I'm still getting the same response when I run the frequency test bands (noticeable response at 25 Hz. and smooth on up to about 100), but the bass SOUNDS as if it is clearer.

The biggest change that I've noticed is the dynamics. When turned on previously & auditioned, the XPR-2 seemed to have some restricted dynamics with my Paradigm speakers. After 24 hours of uninterrupted on time, though, the dynamics sound every bit as good as what my XPA-2 could do.

All of these are purely subjective opinions. I really didn't have any expectations one way or the other, and in fact, I'd forgotten leaving it on at all until I started the music this morning and then realized that the gear was already turned on.

These improvements further reinforce my previous decision to keep this amplifier. Will the sound change further if I continue to leave it on? Who knows... If it stays where it is now, though, I'll be more than satisfied.

Now if Lonnie can just hurry those new tower speakers along...

Boomzilla

[2out2sea]

Ok, so I have been trolling here for some time. I purchased my xpa 2 gen 2 at emofest this year as a fluke. I figured for the price it was a worthwhile venture. What I have found is an amplifier that sounds for all the world like a krell to me. It has significantly more authoritative bass than my previous b&k ex442. It is also very forward. It's dynamics are very good with great attack IMHO. Decay is good, but is maybe slightly imbalanced compared to the quality of leading edge sound of the amp. The amp is also very krell like in that it is fatiguingly bright at 85+ decibels. Lastly the xpa2 isn't the last word in imaging.

I say all of this because I am curious if the Xpr series will provide all of the dynamics that I really enjoy from the xpa2 but be less fatiguing. I ask this because repeatedly I have noted in this thread that boom has indicated the Xpr to be more laid back.

For what it's worth my associated gear is gallo ref3.5 w/ gallo sub amp, audible illusions tube pre amp and Cary cdp. I am also concerned about an impedence mismatch between my amp and pre amp that would be resolved by going to the 100k ohm input impedence of the Xpr.

Lastly, I wanted to state that I am actually amazed at the sound provided by the xpa2. It is much better than I anticipated. However there is always that last little bit...

Thanks for your input...

Brad

[Boomzilla]

Hi Brad -

Now that my XPR-2 is fully warmed up, it has changed its spots slightly. The dynamics, which I previously felt were reticent, have improved. It still isn't quite the equivalent of the XPA-2, but it does noticeably better now than when cold.

The imaging, already a strong point, has also improved. Now, you can close your eyes, and swear that you were in a different place. The width and depth of image are now better than I've previously heard.

The treble has improved. Now the highest treble notes are cleaner and louder relative to the mix.

I still consider the sound more refined than the XPA-2. The R lacks the slight brightness at higher volumes that you mention (and that Garbulky so clearly heard) from the XPA-2.

So I'm now saying that IMHO, the XPR-2 bests the XPA-2 in just about every way. Only for dynamics does the nod go to the XPA-2, and there only by a hair. I still think that the XPA-2 is one of the very best amplifier bargains ever made, but even though it's not cheap, I think that the R is clearly the better amplifier.

[2out2sea]

Thank you for the reply. It is always more valuable to hear an ab comparison vs opinion. I do want to clarify my definition of imaging however to make sure there is no confusion. I have recently switched to the gallo speakers from an aging set of vandersteen series 2. The vandys were my first real dip into the audiophile pool. One of their strengths was the large soundstage they created. Sound was always bigger and deeper than my room. Because that was such a revelation I always listed it at the top of the list of audio priorities. The gallos throw an even larger soundstage, one that rivals what I have heard from even the big magnepans. While I liked this sound initially with the xp2, I found myself tweaking the placement to improve the imaging. While vocals were distinct, the placement of instruments around the expansive soundstage was imprecise and vague. By eliminating toe in and bringing the speakers closer together I was able to improve the imaging significantly, albeit at the expense of a truncated soundstage. What I found was given the choice I prefer precise imaging and placement to a large as life soundstage. Ideally I want both. My hope is that the Xpr series will meet that desire. I have a set of 60w tube mono block enroute that I am going to try first. But, if the dynamics disappear with the huge drop in power I may be calling emotiva for a set of xpr1s. Thank you again for your reply and the info in this thread.

[Boomzilla]

I agree that speaker placement makes more difference than the amplifier used. My current speakers, Paradigm Eclipse BP models) are set wider than they should be to clear my pull-down screen. One of the reasons I'm looking forward to Dan's speakers so much is that I'll be able to place them without interfering with my screen. Should you try the XPR series, I suspect you won't be letting them go... LOL

Merry Christmas - Boomzilla

[Boomzilla]

Update with a different configuration:

Today I moved the Paradigm Eclipse BPs against the side wall. I used the crossover in the Oppo to send all bass below 80 Hz. to my Crown XLS-1500 power amplifier. The Crown was then connected to the woofers (only) of the Paradigm boxes. This gives me 80 to 28 Hz. +/- no more than 3 decibels IN ROOM RESPONSE. I've still got LOTS of output at 25 Hz., and an audible but faint rumble at 20. The 16 Hz. tone on "Also Sprach Zarathustra" is nothing but a bit of soft distortion.

The 80 Hz. on up signal was sent to my XPR-2 and to a pair of (biwired with Blue Jeans cable) Definitive Technology Studiomonitor (sic) SM65 speakers. The SM65s sound far better and more present in the midrange than did the Paradigms, which were profoundly laid-back. After tweaking levels in the Oppo's speaker setup menu, I can't hear where the subwoofer transition happens at all. The four 8" woofers of the Paradigms are but inches from the wall, and the reinforcement makes them sound much tighter than when they were out in the open space of the room. It is also impossible to localize the sound of the subs. I put on some Atlantic Brass Quintet music and when the tuba cuts in on the right, the sound comes from the RIGHT (not from the far left, where the subwoofers actually are).

This combination is honestly some of the best sound that I've ever heard in my room. Good news for the satellite/subwoofer concept and the XPR-2 sounds significantly better with the DefTechs than it did with the Paradigms. I can't wait to audition Lonnie's towers with this equipment!

I realize that the XPR-2 is beyond the budget of many. I was fortunate to be able to afford one. I also realize that many (including myself) do NOT need the absurd power capacity of the amplifier. Even so, the XPR-2's performance at low volumes is equal to or better than any other amplifier I've ever owned. The detail and control must be heard to be believed. I couldn't call the XPR-2 a "best value for the dollar" amplifier; I still think that particular award goes to the XPA-2, but nevertheless, if you have the coin, don't hesitate to try the XPR-2. I suspect that once you hear it, you won't let it go.

Boomzilla

[klinemj]

Uh...boomzilla...when did you change your name to boomerang? Haven't you been insistent on not having a sub but instead having speakers that go full range on their own? No, I must be dreaming.

Mark (PS...glad you have seen the light!)

[Boomzilla]

I'm exceptionally stubborn, but the multiple voices of reason here finally persuaded me. Deep bass? Buy some subs.

[2out2sea]

I just wanted to update that the Cary monos have eliminated my need for the xpr series. I have been listening for over a week a nd couldn't be happier, unless of course they were 300 w instead of 60. I still am amazed at the quality and sound of emotiva gear. I have been very pleased with my xpa2 g2. I wish I could demo a set of the xpr1. Maybe someday I will. For now the tube monos are staying.

[Boomzilla]

Hi 2out2sea -

Tubes are a different world. Those speakers that "like tubes" don't just like them, they LOVE them. I had some Klipsch La Scalas that sounded their best with tubes and just didn't work as well with solid state (in my room & to my ears).

That said, there are far, far more speakers that do well with solid state amps than those that do well with tubes. In my experience, 95% or more of the speakers that I've ever owned sounded "better" to my ears with solid state amps than with tube amps. The major exceptions were speakers where there either wasn't too much low bass, or where I was using the speakers with a self-powered subwoofer.

My current speakers (Definitive Technology SM65) sound better with my XPR-2 than with any amp I've previously tried them with (including both VTL compact 100 mono tube amps and a Rogue Audio Tempest 88 Magnum tube integrated).

For those wanting to try "tube sound on the cheap," may I recommend the Qunpu A-6000 integrated amp. It is a "hybrid" with a tube driver stage & solid-state chip outputs. It sports 18 watts / channel, and will drive most speakers to room level. It is inexpensive, and sounds way better than it's price (from $200 to $250) would indicate.

In any case, the Cary amps are supposed to be some of the very best! Enjoy your sound - I'm sure it's excellent.

Boomzilla

[Poodleluvr]

Dec 29, 2013 22:21:15 GMT -5 Boomzilla said:

I'm exceptionally stubborn, but the multiple voices of reason here finally persuaded me. Deep bass? Buy some subs.

"I’m not one who believes in full-range anything; meaning I will always bring my own subwoofer to the party." ~ Mr. Andrew Robinson 10/21/2013

www.andrew-robinson-online.com/review-emotiva-pro-stealth-6-powered-monitors/

[2out2sea]

I am listening to gallo 3.5 reference speakers. Initially I had a revel sub. I was going to go to stereo subs, but was running out if real estate. I reviewed and read and reviewed some more before deciding to try the gallo sub amp that paired up with my gallo speakers. What I found was amazing bass, but even more I found that powering the secondary voice coils of the gallos added soundstage and more air around the instruments. I do not lack, rest assured. The gallos are slightly forward and so seem to lend themselves to tubes. However Anthony gallo the designer uses spectron class d amps to provide power for demos, etc. fwiw the tubes sound heavenly at bw 70-85 db. Below that they sound flat compared to the xpa2. Anything approaching 100db and the tube amps run out of steam while the the xpa just keeps throwing current at the speakers. Heck not even half of the blue LEDs illuminate on the emotiva at 100db! Some might actually prefer the forward hyper detailed sound provided by the xpa2. For me the smooth luscious sound at the db I routinely listen is intoxicating. Regardless I whole heartedly recommend the gallos. They match superbly with the emotiva amps.