|
|
Post by dmitry on May 18, 2015 9:16:26 GMT -5
Hello, dear forum members.
Now I want to bay new amplifier. Change with XPA-3 and XPA-5.
Please, ask if your know, is true that XPA-3 is "light" version XPA-5 - without 2 power block.
On site description it power/channel characteristic more or less equivalent, on photo power block look the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on May 18, 2015 9:24:23 GMT -5
This is a question easily answered from the "specifications" tab on the Emotiva product page. Off the top of my head, the XPA-3 is every bit as powerful (power supply wise) as the XPA-5. I've driven 4-ohm speakers before with an XPA-5 without any problem. Therefore - I'd say that EITHER amplifier would provide sufficient current for most any speaker on the market.
Boom
|
|
|
|
Post by dmitry on May 18, 2015 9:53:42 GMT -5
As it has been written on this forum (excluding payment discounts and club membership):
Emotiva XPA-3 $799 for 3 channels - $266.3 per channel
Emotiva XPA-5 $999 for 5 channels - $200 per channel
If they are equal in power (for the channel), the XPA-5 a more profitable investment.
Is not it?
|
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on May 18, 2015 10:01:03 GMT -5
"XPA-5 Gen 2 Every system should have one! ".
This line is taken from my sig, I stand by it. : D
|
|
dkami712
Sensei
Overkill is Underrated
Posts: 128
|
Post by dkami712 on May 18, 2015 10:09:39 GMT -5
Dmitry check this out link |
|
|
|
Post by dmitry on May 18, 2015 10:19:37 GMT -5
Thank you for your link. Very interesting comparison. It turns out that XPA-5 is the most successful of the amplifier Emotiva of price / quality ratio.
|
|
|
|
Post by repeetavx on May 18, 2015 10:39:27 GMT -5
Hello, dear forum members. Now I want to bay new amplifier. Change with XPA-3 and XPA-5. Please, ask if your know, is true that XPA-3 is "light" version XPA-5 - without 2 power block. On site description it power/channel characteristic more or less equivalent, on photo power block look the same. Hi dmitry, Yes, the XPA-3 is a XPA-5 with two of the amplifier channels not installed, and the chassis modified to account for this. Also the XPA-3 has a 850 watt power supply. Which means that if you could drive all three channels to their limit at the same time that the XPA-3 could deliver 283.333 watts continuously to your speakers. The XPA-5 has a 1200 watt power supply. Which means that if you could drive all five channels to their limit at the same time that the XPA-5 would deliver 240 watts continuously to your speakers. Owners of the XPA-5 are quick to point out that if you don't use all five channels at any time that the power supply is then free to supply its energy to the channels that are being used. So theoretically if you were to play a stereo source through the XPA-5, the power supply would then be able to supply 600 watts to each channel. Probably not really, but you get the idea. The XPA-3 is a few pounds lighter, and a few hundred dollars less expensive. I really like mine. |
|
cawgijoe
Emo VIPs 
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it." - Yogi Berra
Posts: 5,033
|
Post by cawgijoe on May 18, 2015 10:58:51 GMT -5
It all depends what you need. I have a friend with a Denon receiver who wanted more power to the front channels and hence bought an XPA-3. The rears are powered by the receiver.
Works great.
I have the XMC-1 and use an XPA-5. I needed the extra power channels for the rear. Works great.
|
|
|
|
Post by dmitry on May 18, 2015 12:30:18 GMT -5
Thank very match all!
For myself, I made a decision purchase the XPA-3 for FCL, for surround rear I have and will use XPA-200.
Plus:
- less weight - less shipping coast. Also XPA-3 suitable for the weight limit of free international delivery (Вoundary / Customs);
- more powerful at full load;
- less powerful transformer. It may be important in some moments.
Minus:
- more coast power/channel;
- less channels.
Thank you for your support and patience.
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on May 18, 2015 12:36:23 GMT -5
Hi dmitry you will not be dissapointed  Both the XPA-5 and XPA-3 are powerhouses. Also the XPA-200 does not dissapoint. But personally, if it's just for surround duty, you may be equally well served with a mini-x. They are not that demanding. Or a used UPA-2 (not to be confused with UPA-200) amplifier which is VERY similar to the XPA-200. |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on May 18, 2015 12:48:35 GMT -5
Thank very match all! For myself, I made a decision purchase the XPA-3 for FCL, for surround rear I have and will use XPA-200. Plus: - less weight - less shipping coast. Also XPA-3 suitable for the weight limit of free international delivery (Вoundary / Customs); - more powerful at full load; - less powerful transformer. It may be important in some moments. Minus: - more coast power/channel; - less channels. Thank you for your support and patience. So no experimenting with bi-amping or anything else that will hit your fancy. Two boxes instead of one, another power line,,,,,,,,need I go on? XPA-5 Is just a workhorse! And does it looking so good and effortlessly.  Just saying,,,,,,,,,m |
|
Both the XPA-5 and XPA-3 are powerhouses. Also the XPA-200 does not dissapoint. But personally, if it's just for surround duty, you may be equally well served with a mini-x. They are not that demanding. Or a used UPA-2 (not to be confused with UPA-200) amplifier which is VERY similar to the XPA-200. 
Just saying,,,,,,,,,m