|
|
Post by DavidR on Apr 5, 2016 19:06:37 GMT -5
I have read about anyone commenting on the sound quality going backwards, which would be a bit hard since very few have even heard one. 
You have missed the point completely on the price, the complaints from us Internationals is not what Emotive gets for the product, of course they have to make a profit otherwise they won't be around for long. The issue we have is with the difference between the price Emotiva charges direct and what we have to pay via the local distributor/wholesaler/retailer. Personally I don't believe that paying up to 3 times the price is "pissy wissy" 
Cheers
Gary
Sorry for your situation Gary. For international customers it would not be pissy wissy. I was just taken back by some of the comments. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Apr 5, 2016 20:03:39 GMT -5
There is no doubt that the launch of the Gen 3 is caught up in the change of distribution models and the price effect that will have. As such it's not fair on the Gen 3's which are, I have no doubt, outstanding products in typical Emotiva fashion.
Let's talk about the product itself, as I have no doubt that the international price situation will either stand or fall on the volume over time.
Cheers
Gary
|
|
|
|
Post by broncsrule21 on Apr 5, 2016 21:26:04 GMT -5
Actually they are a power supply rework of the XPR line, so they should sound like the XPR's not the G2 XPA's.
Yes! My RPA-1 sounds better than an XPA-2 |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Apr 5, 2016 21:38:56 GMT -5
Have they ever gone backwards before in SQ performance?
Yes! My RPA-1 sounds better than an XPA-2 There's also the UPA-2 versus the replacement UPA-200. Though in their defense they kept the very nice UPA-2 in the form of the XPA-200 with some upgrades - and price hikes. And also the UPA-200 wasn't bad. It just wasn't the UPA-2.  UPA-2  vs UPA-200  And also the UPA-5 - a five xpa-5 blade UPA amp versus the UPA-500 - a single blade UPA amp. UPA-5  vs UPA-500  |
|
|
|
Post by smarties on Apr 6, 2016 3:06:15 GMT -5
I've held off posting my thoughts BUT I can't believe the crap Emotiva has taken in response to the release of their new line of XPA amps. Most of it is based on pure speculation. Pissy wissy about them raising the price. Geez, no one in business wants to NOT make a profit. If you don't like what they are offering go elsewhere OR start your own audio company. Hire some top notch audio engineers, creative marketing people, sales team, support staff, etc. Design the amp and related gear that meets your dreams, build a prototype, tweak it, build a bunch and go for it. Oh, don't forget to hire that cost accountant who's going to tell you what you have to charge to make a profit and stay in business. Really people. I happen to think they made some very smart decisions from a business stand point. Have they ever gone backwards before in SQ performance? I have read about anyone commenting on the sound quality going backwards, which would be a bit hard since very few have even heard one.
You have missed the point completely on the price, the complaints from us Internationals is not what Emotive gets for the product, of course they have to make a profit otherwise they won't be around for long. The issue we have is with the difference between the price Emotiva charges direct and what we have to pay via the local distributor/wholesaler/retailer. Personally I don't believe that paying up to 3 times the price is "pissy wissy"
Cheers
Gary
I paid a lot for my two ATI amps. They're far more expensive than what they sell for in the US. Even if you take currency conversion (It's $1 for £1) NOT 70p for every $1 |
|
bootman
Emo VIPs 
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Apr 6, 2016 6:14:29 GMT -5
the Audiocontrol Maestro M9? link It's the surround processor the XMR-1 should be.. I'm not sure what has happened to this thread, but since it's all over the map already I'll chime in too. Based on my very quick analysis of the spec page, mostly looking at the big details and physical inputs & outputs, I'm gonna have to disagree with you here. This processor doesn't appear to be any more than the XMC-1, except it does the 4 height channels for Atmos etc. In other places it actually has less connection options (although it's hard to tell 100% for sure because I couldn't find a picture to really zoom in). And they both use Dirac. The XMC-1 is great, and this processor might be great also (especially if it has cool features I skipped over), but $6400 more for 4 height channels is ridiculous. This thing is no where near what we have been lead to believe the XMR-1 will be. Not even close. [My "looks" tastes agree with Keith here. This might look good sitting in with McIntosh stuff, but it would look nasty in my rack.]But this brings me back to the point I tried to make in the other thread. Since it was explained to us that the XMC-1 can unfortunately not be easily changed to do 7.2.4 using the existing Zone 2&3 outputs (that would have made the entire middle class audiophile world happy campers), I feel strongly that there needs to be an XMC-2 in the future (nearer rather than later) that simply adds the 4 extra channels and be done with it. The XMR-1 will be killer (if it actually comes to fruition), but for many it will be physical and monetary overkill (If 11 channels is a niche, then 16 is a super niche). The XMC-1 may be great, but it's life span will be cut much shorter without the ability to do Atmos and the like. There are potential work arounds for not having the latest HDMI connections, but there aren't work arounds for a lack of processing capabilities (not that I know of anyway). Whether people actually make use of Atmos and the like or not is not the issue. The issue is that every single other receiver and processor on the market will have the ability, and most people aren't going to buy something that lacks such a key feature. Like it or not, Atmos/DTS:X/Auro is the future. Edit: One more thing. Some people here are going to be pissed for me saying this, but I think it's much more important to make the XMC-2 as stated, and concentrate on making that happen first, rather than spend time on the XMR-1 right now. I think the XMC-2 is much more a bread & butter component than the niche XMR-1 would ever be. If the XMC-1 had the 4 height channel ability right now, all debates/discussions/arguments would be gone. There probably wouldn't be any better optional processor on the market. As I've said before, if Emotiva made the XMC-2, I'd buy it this Christmas for sure. Excellent post. We should start another thread on this topic. A XMC-2 with the same chassis and only the 4 ATMOS channels replacing zones 2 & 3 would be a popular item I would think. Add in HDMI 2.0a on all 8 inputs and sell it for $3K and I think it will be a winner. |
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Apr 6, 2016 8:52:25 GMT -5
I'm not sure what has happened to this thread, but since it's all over the map already I'll chime in too. Based on my very quick analysis of the spec page, mostly looking at the big details and physical inputs & outputs, I'm gonna have to disagree with you here. This processor doesn't appear to be any more than the XMC-1, except it does the 4 height channels for Atmos etc. In other places it actually has less connection options (although it's hard to tell 100% for sure because I couldn't find a picture to really zoom in). And they both use Dirac. The XMC-1 is great, and this processor might be great also (especially if it has cool features I skipped over), but $6400 more for 4 height channels is ridiculous. This thing is no where near what we have been lead to believe the XMR-1 will be. Not even close. [My "looks" tastes agree with Keith here. This might look good sitting in with McIntosh stuff, but it would look nasty in my rack.]But this brings me back to the point I tried to make in the other thread. Since it was explained to us that the XMC-1 can unfortunately not be easily changed to do 7.2.4 using the existing Zone 2&3 outputs (that would have made the entire middle class audiophile world happy campers), I feel strongly that there needs to be an XMC-2 in the future (nearer rather than later) that simply adds the 4 extra channels and be done with it. The XMR-1 will be killer (if it actually comes to fruition), but for many it will be physical and monetary overkill (If 11 channels is a niche, then 16 is a super niche). The XMC-1 may be great, but it's life span will be cut much shorter without the ability to do Atmos and the like. There are potential work arounds for not having the latest HDMI connections, but there aren't work arounds for a lack of processing capabilities (not that I know of anyway). Whether people actually make use of Atmos and the like or not is not the issue. The issue is that every single other receiver and processor on the market will have the ability, and most people aren't going to buy something that lacks such a key feature. Like it or not, Atmos/DTS:X/Auro is the future. Edit: One more thing. Some people here are going to be pissed for me saying this, but I think it's much more important to make the XMC-2 as stated, and concentrate on making that happen first, rather than spend time on the XMR-1 right now. I think the XMC-2 is much more a bread & butter component than the niche XMR-1 would ever be. If the XMC-1 had the 4 height channel ability right now, all debates/discussions/arguments would be gone. There probably wouldn't be any better optional processor on the market. As I've said before, if Emotiva made the XMC-2, I'd buy it this Christmas for sure. Excellent post. We should start another thread on this topic. A XMC-2 with the same chassis and only the 4 ATMOS channels replacing zones 2 & 3 would be a popular item I would think. Add in HDMI 2.0a on all 8 inputs and sell it for $3K and I think it will be a winner. I can make one when I get a second. I'm thinking it should include a poll to help collect data. Although it might get skewed by people who already own an XMC-1 chiming in against it (they might try to down play the idea since having to totally swap out their "upgradable" unit would be annoying). I have made mention of this several times in other threads besides this one, and have even had a good conversation with KeithL about it where he explains why it's unfortunately not easily done in the current XMC-1. Hence the need for an XMC-2. But please note, while I did think of this on my own (I didn't read of it), I am not the first person to think of it. Someone posted that the credit for that should go to Tony (ansat). It could also be others. But I do think it's a good idea. How many people really use Zone outputs? I'd guess more people would prefer 4 height channels instead of Zone outputs. Of course ultimately if Emotiva could make it an option to use one or the other depending on the final user's needs that would be best. EDIT TO ADD THIS INFORMATION:My original question (and may other posts discussing the need) and where discussion with KeithL takes place. Start here in this thread and then read forward. Please note as with any other thread posts go back and forth on different topics, but it’s still a pretty good thread, until the end at least where it goes a bit ugly. emotivalounge.proboards.com/post/799054/threadNote: It was AudioHTIT says it was Tony, and that Lonnie said it would require more than just a few simple tweaks.And a post here where KeithL and I were discussing the potential differences of Atmos even without height channels. There is also some good reading in this thread about the need for an XMC-2 and other things. emotivalounge.proboards.com/post/796115/thread |
|
|
|
Post by DavidR on Apr 6, 2016 9:07:56 GMT -5
Have they ever gone backwards before in SQ performance?
Yes! My RPA-1 sounds better than an XPA-2 Are those two in the same family/line of amps? RPA is a totally diff layout from the XPA line. |
|
|
|
Post by creimes on Apr 6, 2016 9:13:50 GMT -5
Yes! My RPA-1 sounds better than an XPA-2 There's also the UPA-2 versus the replacement UPA-200. Though in their defense they kept the very nice UPA-2 in the form of the XPA-200 with some upgrades - and price hikes. And also the UPA-200 wasn't bad. It just wasn't the UPA-2. UPA-2 vs UPA-200 And also the UPA-5 - a five xpa-5 blade UPA amp versus the UPA-500 - a single blade UPA amp. UPA-5 vs UPA-500 That's not a UPA-5 Gar that's an XPA-5, one thing I found interesting when I owned the USP-1, UPA-1's and a UPA-500 at the same time I actually preferred listening to 2ch music with the UPA-500 connected to the USP-1 and not the UPA-1's, it actually sounded better through the UPA-500 go figure right  I don't think it always about how much power the amp produces. Chad |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Apr 6, 2016 9:35:33 GMT -5
There's also the UPA-2 versus the replacement UPA-200. Though in their defense they kept the very nice UPA-2 in the form of the XPA-200 with some upgrades - and price hikes. And also the UPA-200 wasn't bad. It just wasn't the UPA-2. UPA-2 vs UPA-200 And also the UPA-5 - a five xpa-5 blade UPA amp versus the UPA-500 - a single blade UPA amp. UPA-5 vs UPA-500 That's not a UPA-5 Gar that's an XPA-5, one thing I found interesting when I owned the USP-1, UPA-1's and a UPA-500 at the same time I actually preferred listening to 2ch music with the UPA-500 connected to the USP-1 and not the UPA-1's, it actually sounded better through the UPA-500 go figure right I don't think it always about how much power the amp produces. Chad I found the UPA-500 had a different sound signature. It didn't sound bad by any means. Emotiva doesn't produce bad amps! I apologise for the picture mix up. I think this is a UPA-5. I was trying to find a picture of the insides. But they were hard to find.  |
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Apr 6, 2016 10:18:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Apr 6, 2016 10:55:44 GMT -5
There's also the UPA-2 versus the replacement UPA-200. Though in their defense they kept the very nice UPA-2 in the form of the XPA-200 with some upgrades - and price hikes. And also the UPA-200 wasn't bad. It just wasn't the UPA-2. UPA-2 vs UPA-200 And also the UPA-5 - a five xpa-5 blade UPA amp versus the UPA-500 - a single blade UPA amp. UPA-5 vs UPA-500 That's not a UPA-5 Gar that's an XPA-5, one thing I found interesting when I owned the USP-1, UPA-1's and a UPA-500 at the same time I actually preferred listening to 2ch music with the UPA-500 connected to the USP-1 and not the UPA-1's, it actually sounded better through the UPA-500 go figure right I don't think it always about how much power the amp produces. Chad I had the same experience as you. |
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Apr 6, 2016 11:01:30 GMT -5
So what is up with these posts with Caps Lock and Bold letters?
|
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Apr 6, 2016 11:11:24 GMT -5
Fox News journalists have infiltrated the thread.
|
|
mrwest
Seeker Of Truth
Posts: 2 
|
Post by mrwest on Apr 7, 2016 14:03:03 GMT -5
I am a customer and already have my order in for a XPA-7 GEN 3. Dan, I am very excited about the new GEN 3! I am excited to the point of being a customer, waiting for my GEN 3 to ship. I do have a question about warmth, with the CLASS H power supply design. My ears do pick up the warmth that a toroidal transformer power supply provides.
Dan, will the new Class H power supply power supply design provide the warm toroidal transformer sound?
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Apr 7, 2016 14:12:15 GMT -5
If it's anything like the XPR-2's, it will sound warm enough for ya But most Emotiva amps are designed to be neutral in sound. Things aren't usually over or under-emphasized. Though each has its own unique sound signatures. |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Apr 7, 2016 14:14:30 GMT -5
I am a customer and already have my order in for a XPA-7 GEN 3. Dan, I am very excited about the new GEN 3! I am excited to the point of being a customer, waiting for my GEN 3 to ship. I do have a question about warmth, with the CLASS H power supply design. My ears do pick up the warmth that a toroidal transformer power supply provides. Dan, will the new Class H power supply power supply design provide the warm toroidal transformer sound? This is what we are all waiting for!! Please post your thoughts here when you've had time to listen to it. emotivalounge.proboards.com/thread/46530/got-xpa-gen-3 |
|
mrwest
Seeker Of Truth
Posts: 2
|
Post by mrwest on Apr 7, 2016 15:00:52 GMT -5
Yes, I will post to emotivalounge.proboards.com/thread/46530/got-xpa-gen-3 after testing with some Blu-ray concerts I have a reference for. I will let everyone know if the new Emotiva GEN 3 amplifier is too digital. Please do not mistake, I am not a tube amp McIntosh fanboy, who will spend all their savings for the warm tube sound. However, I do prefer the Marantz warm sound of a toroidal transformer. Compared to Yamaha, Onkyo and Integra which in my experience and reviews have a more neutral sound. You can hear the warmth and difference, and some of that is a preference for music listening, over movie listening. |
|
|
|
Post by smarties on Apr 7, 2016 15:04:02 GMT -5
"Compared to Yamaha, Onkyo and Integra which in my experience and reviews have a more neutral sound. "
Those have EI transformers, generally.
That's if you think power supply changes the tone in sound...which I doubt.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hair Nick on Jul 19, 2016 16:13:49 GMT -5
*Will return with new AP data
|
|
I don't think it always about how much power the amp produces.
