|
|
Post by beekermartin on May 14, 2016 9:46:19 GMT -5
I haven't been to this site in a long time. I noticed that there was no XPA-2/3/5/7. Just the new generation XPA3 which is modular. What surprised me is the weight rating of the gen 3 compared to gen 1/2. I have a gen 1 XPA-2 and XPA-5. They both weigh ~70lbs if I remember correctly. According to the specs a Gen3 XPA with 2 channels only weighs 35.5 lbs. With 5 channels it only weighs 46 lbs.
What changed to make the gen3 so much lighter?
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on May 14, 2016 9:53:21 GMT -5
I haven't been to this site in a long time. I noticed that there was no XPA-2/3/5/7. Just the new generation XPA3 which is modular. What surprised me is the weight rating of the gen 3 compared to gen 1/2. I have a gen 1 XPA-2 and XPA-5. They both weigh ~70lbs if I remember correctly. According to the specs a Gen3 XPA with 2 channels only weighs 35.5 lbs. With 5 channels it only weighs 46 lbs. What changed to make the gen3 so much lighter? They replaced the big torroidal transformers with a power supply the size of about four small capacitors. It is a switching power supply and it's rated for 3.2 KVA (which is quite a lot). This is it.  If you look at the pic below it's the yellow thing near the front of the amp (left of the pic)  Here's the old XPA-3 for comparison (I believe the XPA-5 has a bigger power supply than it)  |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on May 14, 2016 9:54:13 GMT -5
I haven't been to this site in a long time. I noticed that there was no XPA-2/3/5/7. Just the new generation XPA3 which is modular. What surprised me is the weight rating of the gen 3 compared to gen 1/2. I have a gen 1 XPA-2 and XPA-5. They both weigh ~70lbs if I remember correctly. According to the specs a Gen3 XPA with 2 channels only weighs 35.5 lbs. With 5 channels it only weighs 46 lbs. What changed to make the gen3 so much lighter? The weight difference is primarily due to the SMPS (switching power supply). |
|
|
|
Post by repeetavx on May 14, 2016 9:57:37 GMT -5
Maybe the blades weight less too.
|
|
|
|
Post by beekermartin on May 14, 2016 10:11:03 GMT -5
Thanks for the quick posts!
I always thought a torroidal transformer was the best type for audio quality? Maybe that has changed?
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on May 14, 2016 10:41:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by DavidR on May 14, 2016 10:56:04 GMT -5
Thanks for the quick posts! I always thought a torroidal transformer was the best type for audio quality? Maybe that has changed? The heavy transformer is now considered a boat anchor and yesterday's technology. |
|
|
|
Post by beekermartin on May 14, 2016 11:24:06 GMT -5
I will do some reading. Thanks for the responses.
I didn't know power supply technology has improved that much in the last few years. I have a Marantz 8801 with a toroidal power supply and even the newest 8802a has one as well. I am surprised Marantz is still using one if there are better options that weigh much less.
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on May 14, 2016 12:18:22 GMT -5
Thanks for the quick posts! I always thought a torroidal transformer was the best type for audio quality? Maybe that has changed? Apparently....it is now obsolete according to Emotiva....  My poor xpa-1s have been relegated to door stop duty due to this announcement. I can't even give them away! Nobody wants it. People say no thanks I'm going to stick with my 5 watt Lepai amp. At least it has a switching power supply. I tried to give it to the garbage man and he turned me down too.  Kidding aside, whether it is or isn't is another question though. I would choose a torroid myself hence my signature.  |
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 14, 2016 12:33:00 GMT -5
My understanding was that the XPA-1 wasn't going anywhere. No plans to retire it from what I read.
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on May 14, 2016 19:42:12 GMT -5
I haven't been to this site in a long time. I noticed that there was no XPA-2/3/5/7. Just the new generation XPA3 which is modular. What surprised me is the weight rating of the gen 3 compared to gen 1/2. I have a gen 1 XPA-2 and XPA-5. They both weigh ~70lbs if I remember correctly. According to the specs a Gen3 XPA with 2 channels only weighs 35.5 lbs. With 5 channels it only weighs 46 lbs. What changed to make the gen3 so much lighter? They replaced the big torroidal transformers with a power supply the size of about four small capacitors. It is a switching power supply and it's rated for 3.2 KVA (which is quite a lot). This is it. If you look at the pic below it's the yellow thing near the front of the amp (left of the pic) Here's the old XPA-3 for comparison (I believe the XPA-5 has a bigger power supply than it) Shipping a big, heavy transformer around costs a lot and increases damage potential. There ARE a few downsides to switchers, but most can be worked around using careful design and execution. Some people say 'dynamic' power is an issue with switchers, too. The one problem I know about that CAN rear its ugly head is RF which SMPS can generate due to harmonics of the switching frequency. I never heard that with my ICE amp. But my Plasma TV? It REALLY messes with AM radio reception out to maybe 30 feet. |
|
|
|
Post by nwobhm on May 17, 2016 16:04:45 GMT -5
I personally have owned some high end PS Audio switching amps and was not happy with them. They had a clinical and cold sound to them that I just could not enjoy. Granted, this was several years ago and they may have come a long way since then.
|
|
|
|
Post by DavidR on May 17, 2016 16:33:43 GMT -5
I personally have owned some high end PS Audio switching amps and was not happy with them. They had a clinical and cold sound to them that I just could not enjoy. Granted, this was several years ago and they may have come a long way since then. I find it hard to believe that a power supply has a 'sound' to it. There is so much between the power supply and the speaker connection that affects sound in the audio circuit. Perhaps it was just the way that amp sounded and had nothing to do with the power supply. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on May 17, 2016 16:53:29 GMT -5
I personally have owned some high end PS Audio switching amps and was not happy with them. They had a clinical and cold sound to them that I just could not enjoy. Granted, this was several years ago and they may have come a long way since then. PS Audio also makes Class D "switching" amplifiers, this is of course different than the XPA Gen 3 which is a Class A/B amplifier with an SMPS "switching" power supply. A Class D amp could certainly have a different (and potentially less enjoyable) sound. |
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 9,929
|
Post by KeithL on May 17, 2016 16:53:57 GMT -5
You're conflating "switching amps" and "switch mode power supply"; the XPA Gen3 is NOT "a switching amplifier". The XPA Gen3 amps are NOT "switching amplifiers"; that term is generally used to refer to "Class D" amplifiers. The XPA Gen3 amps are in fact Class A/B amplifiers (connected to the power supply using a Class H topology - which also makes them "Class H amplifiers".) However, the XPA Gen3 does use a switch mode power supply (SMPS). (Many Class A/B amplifiers use linear power supplies, and most Class D amplifiers use SMPS power supplies - but other combinations are not uncommon.) Note that we don't have anything against Class D amplifiers; some of our best friends are Class D - including the ICEpower modules in our new Emersa line.... but not the XPA Gen3's.  I personally have owned some high end PS Audio switching amps and was not happy with them. They had a clinical and cold sound to them that I just could not enjoy. Granted, this was several years ago and they may have come a long way since then. I find it hard to believe that a power supply has a 'sound' to it. There is so much between the power supply and the speaker connection that affects sound in the audio circuit. Perhaps it was just the way that amp sounded and had nothing to do with the power supply. |
|
|
|
Post by nwobhm on May 17, 2016 17:11:07 GMT -5
Indeed, I am - my apologizes. I understand, now. I am off to a rip-roaring start of making an idiot out of myself!! I would very much like to hear the XPA Gen3 in that context. However, I do have somewhat defend myself in regards to the power supply having an impact upon the sound. It most certainly does, no question about it, especially in the context of dynamics, PRAT, and "punch" - again, this may not be an issue with the XPA Gen3, just saying that assuming the power supply doesn't have an influence on the sound would be a flat earth viewpoint. You're conflating "switching amps" and "switch mode power supply"; the XPA Gen3 is NOT "a switching amplifier". The XPA Gen3 amps are NOT "switching amplifiers"; that term is generally used to refer to "Class D" amplifiers. The XPA Gen3 amps are in fact Class A/B amplifiers (connected to the power supply using a Class H topology - which also makes them "Class H amplifiers".) However, the XPA Gen3 does use a switch mode power supply (SMPS). (Many Class A/B amplifiers use linear power supplies, and most Class D amplifiers use SMPS power supplies - but other combinations are not uncommon.) Note that we don't have anything against Class D amplifiers; some of our best friends are Class D - including the ICEpower modules in our new Emersa line.... but not the XPA Gen3's. I find it hard to believe that a power supply has a 'sound' to it. There is so much between the power supply and the speaker connection that affects sound in the audio circuit. Perhaps it was just the way that amp sounded and had nothing to do with the power supply. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on May 17, 2016 17:59:26 GMT -5
I personally have owned some high end PS Audio switching amps and was not happy with them. They had a clinical and cold sound to them that I just could not enjoy. Granted, this was several years ago and they may have come a long way since then. I owned a PSAudio GCC250 which had ASP modules x2. I found the HF was NOT to my liking. Brittle sometimes? And listening thru my panels, there was some picket-fencing. A conventional A/B amp has no such issues, at least in MY system. As for a PS having a 'sound'? The CAN influence the sound, and not usually for the Better if they PS is NOT up to snuff. Various IM phenom can occur and in a very inadequate supply, you'll simply lack dynamics while the PS runs at its limit. This applies to both conventional and switching supplies. This should NOT apply to EMO gear which if you like the sound or not, has competent PS design and execution. And it is a hair-splitting point for some, but I do NOT consider 'H' as an amplifier class, but rather a Power Supply topology. Certain changes need be made in the amp section to accomodate multiple voltage rails, but that doesn't change the OUTPUT gender. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,929
|
Post by KeithL on May 18, 2016 10:29:15 GMT -5
A Class D amplifier is essentially "a high powered DAC". The audio signal is converted to digital (or it may come in as a digital signal), it is then "amplified digitally", and then converted back to an analog signal right at the output. Therefore, the signal passes through the equivalent of the reconstruction filter in a DAC - which is a critical part of the signal chain. However, to make matters even more complicated, the output of that reconstruction filter must then feed a load that has a largely unknown load impedance (the load is the speaker, and each speaker has its own distinctive impedance curve; this makes it complicated to design a reconstruction filter that will work well with EVERY speaker you might connect to the output of your amp). This makes a good Class D amplifier much more difficult to design, and increases the odds that a given design might be inconsistent - and perform quite differently with different speakers. (This has traditionally been one of the major complications of designing a good Class D amplifier; designing a good Class A/B amp actually is a lot easier.) And, yes, of course the power supply affects the sound of an amplifier... but many audiophiles seem to misunderstand how and why this occurs... and the vague and confusing terminology commonly used in audiophile literature often makes matter worse. Different power supply designs perform differently, and different amplifier circuits respond differently to those differences, and this synergy is what ends up determining the overall sound of the amplifier. For example, certain amplifier circuits are very sensitive to variations in supply voltage, and so require a very stable and well-regulated power supply - and, if their power supply doesn't perform well in that regard, then they don't sound good; yet other types of amplifier circuits are virtually immune to minor variations in supply voltage. (And, as it turns out, the design characteristics that make for a SMPS that performs well in a computer are somewhat different than the optimum characteristics for an SMPS used to power a Class A/B amplifier.) It's not so much that the power supply "affects the way the amplifier sounds" as that the design of the power supply determines what the limitations on the amplifier's performance will be - and where they will occur. I would also like discuss whether "transformers" are "obsolete"..... The short answer there is that "obsolete" is a very negative term - and it really isn't appropriate in this context. No device is obsolete until it actually fails to perform the job it was intended to do. Transformers work, and your XPA-1, or your XPA Gen2 amp, with its toroidal transformer, didn't mystically change - for the worse - the day the XPA Gen3 amps were released. It still sounds just as good as it ever did. Power supplies that utilize high quality transformers work just fine, and are in fact reasonably efficient; it's just that a modern SMPS can deliver slightly better performance, for lower cost, and offers a significant reduction in weight - which, again, reduces cost overall, reduces shipping costs, and reduces the likelihood of shipping damage. By operating at far above the audible range of frequencies, an SMPS can use a far smaller and lighter transformer (yes, your SMPS does still have a transformer in it - but high-frequency transformers can be much smaller and much more efficient than transformers that run at 50 Hz or 60 Hz.), which is what makes it smaller and lighter. Another huge benefit is that, while the 60 Hz line frequency used by traditional power supplies is difficult to perfectly shield against, and even the tiniest bit of 60 Hz noise leaking into the audio circuitry will be audible as annoying hum, the frequencies used inside an SMPS are easier to shield, and are totally inaudible to humans. All of this combines to usually make a SMPS a clearly better choice to power a high-powered audio amplifier - but it doesn't mean that the older technology is "obsolete". (There are still many situations, like in our BASX amps, where the relative cost and performance of transformer-based power supplies still makes good sense.) As usual, I would urge anyone to compare the overall performance and sound quality of our various amps, rather than to make assumptions based on the particular technology utilized by each. (I would be surprised if you - or I - could tell the difference if we were to substitute an equivalent transformer-based power supply in one of our new Gen3 amps.... at least if you didn't try to lift it ) I personally have owned some high end PS Audio switching amps and was not happy with them. They had a clinical and cold sound to them that I just could not enjoy. Granted, this was several years ago and they may have come a long way since then. I owned a PSAudio GCC250 which had ASP modules x2. I found the HF was NOT to my liking. Brittle sometimes? And listening thru my panels, there was some picket-fencing. A conventional A/B amp has no such issues, at least in MY system. As for a PS having a 'sound'? The CAN influence the sound, and not usually for the Better if they PS is NOT up to snuff. Various IM phenom can occur and in a very inadequate supply, you'll simply lack dynamics while the PS runs at its limit. This applies to both conventional and switching supplies. This should NOT apply to EMO gear which if you like the sound or not, has competent PS design and execution. And it is a hair-splitting point for some, but I do NOT consider 'H' as an amplifier class, but rather a Power Supply topology. Certain changes need be made in the amp section to accomodate multiple voltage rails, but that doesn't change the OUTPUT gender. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on May 18, 2016 11:40:39 GMT -5
my judgement about 'd' amps was not 'snap'. I owned the amp for several years.
As you should know, setup of panel speakers can be a real PIA. Distance from the front wall, toe, distance to sidewalls and even 'hardness' of room all come into play.
When I first got my 'd' amp, I went thru every trick I knew to optimize the speakers. I very carefully measured between speakers and to the front wall. I adjusted and LISTENED.
Some setups lasted 1 minute. Some lasted 20 minutes.
I tried tweeters IN. I tried tweeters OUT. I even flipped the panels around and tried listening to the Pole Piece side. That, BTW, was the original orientation of Magnepan. Original models are oriented so the listener is
hearing the pole piece side. It looks ugly that way with panels made since the mid-90s or so, since you end up with the speaker connection / fuse plate on the front of the speaker! I even briefly experimented with TILT. Magnepan
supplies some tilt spacers which I experimented with. Though many setups lasted only minutes, the BEST were listened to for weeks or months.
I finally ended up with tweeters in, 11 degrees of toe and mylar TO the listener. Great image and presentation. Sounded great.
But ultimately, something was missing.
Now? Will anyone else have this problem? I rather don't think it's common. Even my friend, running an ALL EMO BIAMP of Magnepan 20s is very satisfied and somewhat amazed. His has an incredible ear and sense of detail.
And yes, I think maybe the reconstruction filter is partly to blame. With the ASP modules, frequency response suffers as impedance drops. I understand the NEW generation stuff is not subject to this. With this impedance drop comes phase shift. I think THAT is ultimaely what disturbed me. An unfortunate interaction of crossover and amp characteristics.
Could I 'tell' right away I had a 'd' amp? No, in this case it took a long time. And as for the PS in the GIII amps? I rather doubt anyone will hear the difference under music or movie conditions. You MIGHT be able to induce a problem under Laboratory conditions or trying to reproduce stuff which will NEVER occur in real music or a movie sound track. But such issues are irrelevent to the real world.
|
|
