|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jul 4, 2016 7:53:05 GMT -5
So, as I understand your comments, Mr. Levkof the existing Emotivas (XSP-1 & XMC-1) are already "the best a man can get." And regardless of price! I've added a poll to this thread to test that theory.
And if a significant number of responders (doesn't even have to be half, since this IS Emotiva's Lounge) think that better sounding gear is available out there, then to what do you attribute that?
1. They're all fooled by marketing & advertising
2. They can't really hear any difference and are fooling themselves with expectation bias
3. The competitors actually have a better-sounding product
And if (Heaven forbid) it turns out to be number three, then if not for better parts or better engineering, WHY do other products sound better?
I'm getting tired of all the knee-jerk Emotiva Fanboys telling me that I don't know what I'm talking about, that Emotiva is already taking care of us (no further need to worry my empty little head about it), and that if better sound quality were possible, Emotiva would have already provided it. If that were the case, we'd still have the UMC products in production and the current ones would be just bells & whistles to shill the rubes out of their money.
Parts quality and engineering DO improve over time. Period. I don't expect Emotiva to be at the cutting edge of the performance envelope (and particularly not at Emotiva's prices), but to claim that better sound isn't available at any cost is just plain incorrect.
ORIGINAL POST:
The XSP-1, Gen 2 has been in the product line for an unusually long time (for Emotiva). Might there be any hope of a new "flagship" stereo preamp in the foreseeable future?
And for speculation purposes - what features might YOU like to see on such a preamp? My list is short:
Line stage instead of full preamp to keep the price close to where the XSP-2's price is (those wanting phono can use Emotiva's excellent outboard unit)
Ladder-stepped, resistor-pair bass management with accurate markings
A switchable second set of main outputs
An optional sliver face plate
A back-lit remote
Maybe a lower profile (most of the stuff in the existing case is empty air)
Maybe a front input jack if you wanted to connect a phone on a temporary basis
And that's about IT! All the excellent existing features (HT bypass, Trigger out, Processor Loop, Tone controls, etc.) should stay.
Comments?
|
|
|
|
Post by creimes on Jul 4, 2016 8:10:26 GMT -5
For you I'm sure Emotiva will do anything, no  |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jul 4, 2016 9:15:26 GMT -5
My requirements: Sound better than the old one. Stay fully balanced with bass management.
|
|
|
|
Post by chicagorspec on Jul 4, 2016 9:19:31 GMT -5
My requirements: Sound better than the old one. Stay fully balanced with bass management. ^ This, and line level only with outboard XPS for those wanting phono, as Boom suggested. |
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Jul 4, 2016 9:22:34 GMT -5
I'd like to see a second subwoofer input added to the HT bypass. 1 in/2 out isn't very useful considering most of today's HT processors (including the XMC-1) have two subwoofer outputs.
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jul 4, 2016 12:38:21 GMT -5
I'd like to see a second subwoofer input added to the HT bypass. 1 in/2 out isn't very useful considering most of today's HT processors (including the XMC-1) have two subwoofer outputs. I'd put this ^^^ and Boomzilla 's stepped crossover at the top of my list. I'd actually want all the bass management functions on the remote (with settings showing on the display) – where I kept my XSP-1 it was very difficult to get to the back and make adjustments. I'd also echo garbulky 's comment on a balanced signal with bass management, I might extend that to the tone controls and ask for a wider range than plus/minus 3dB. I'd prefer to keep the phono section on-board however, fewer cables and connections. A second set of outputs is useful too. For the record, the current unit is the XSP-1 Gen 2 (not XSP-2), so the new unit would likely be the XSP-2, or possibly XSP-1 Gen 3 (less likely if it had significant changes). |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Jul 4, 2016 13:11:25 GMT -5
The XPS-1 as a modular optional unit for those not wanting a phono stage unless cost is not significant.
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs 
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,094
|
Post by klinemj on Jul 4, 2016 14:38:19 GMT -5
I don't really need one, so..."whatevah..."
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jul 4, 2016 15:13:35 GMT -5
The XSP-1 Gen 1 ran very successfully for a number of years and the XSP-1 Gen 2 has quite a number of changes, technical up dates, double sided boards etc. My guess, based on the BasX direction, is that any XSP update (perhaps XSP-1 Gen 3) will have a high quality DAC implementation on board. I'm not convinced of the need for other changes.
Personally I don't see the necessity for a calibrated cross over, I'm not a fan of the simplistic "set the 2 cross overs at 80hz and you're done". Whether it's 70 or 80 or 90 Hz, I've never seen that be the best setting, it's a guide line, somewhere to start that is then tuned by listening or using an equalisation process. Having a calibrated cross over will encourage people to "set and forget" and that IMHO is not a good thing.
Even as a single sub woofer preferrer I can see that some people may have a need for multiple sub woofer by pass functionality, but how many? If there is 2 then people with 3, 4, 5 etc subs will still not be happy. Then there is the question of cross over, in many (perhaps even most) multiple sub woofer installations a single cross over point is far from ideal. Be it location demanded and/or different subwoofers. If there is demonstrable need for 2 sub woofer bypasses then there equally needs to be 2 cross over settings for when the XSP is in control of the bass management.
Cheers
Gary
|
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator 
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,864
|
Post by LCSeminole on Jul 4, 2016 15:32:02 GMT -5
The XSP-1 Gen 1 ran very successfully for a number of years and the XSP-1 Gen 2 has quite a number of changes, technical up dates, double sided boards etc. My guess, based on the BasX direction, is that any XSP update (perhaps XSP-1 Gen 3) will have a high quality DAC implementation on board. I'm not convinced of the need for other changes. I would definitely expect a high quality DAC implementation in an updated version of the current XSP-1. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jul 4, 2016 15:49:43 GMT -5
See that's something I don't want. I don't want an all in one unit. I want a purist unit with two functions - produce the sound and change the volume really well. But I see the need for a high quality balanced subwoofer setup. And I can also understand the value of HT bypass integration - though I could live without it. But for instance a high quality DAC - Already they have the PT-1000. That uses a single DAC. To get higher quality than that they would be looking at DC-1 territory with its two DACs. I'd rather all that money go towards just having an amazingly good preamp. Also a DAC preamp unit that is very good is already out there - it's the XMC-1. Also an EMERSA processor will be out soon at a lower price point. What I am thinking about is a nice preamp. No digital circuitry. Just do the sound amazingly well. Overbuilt. Dual mono, class A circuitry. A competitor to this: www.audio-gd.com/HE/HE-1/HE-1EN.htm Or maybe that may be looking at too much with its regenerative power suppy. Maybe the one step down version of that the Audio GD Master one. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jul 4, 2016 17:48:47 GMT -5
The XSP-1 Gen 1 ran very successfully for a number of years and the XSP-1 Gen 2 has quite a number of changes, technical up dates, double sided boards etc. My guess, based on the BasX direction, is that any XSP update (perhaps XSP-1 Gen 3) will have a high quality DAC implementation on board. I'm not convinced of the need for other changes. I would definitely expect a high quality DAC implementation in an updated version of the current XSP-1. I think I'd want a built in DAC as well, It fits where I think the X series should be, refine the XSP-1 and add digital connectivity. Allow people to hook up the most common sources with a single box. I'd hope Lonnie could get a phono stage and DAC in the same box, but the DAC would probably be more useful to most. The 'purist' line stage probably belongs in whatever the reference series evolves into. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jul 4, 2016 18:07:33 GMT -5
Personally I don't see the necessity for a calibrated cross over, I'm not a fan of the simplistic "set the 2 cross overs at 80hz and you're done". Whether it's 70 or 80 or 90 Hz, I've never seen that be the best setting, it's a guide line, somewhere to start that is then tuned by listening or using an equalisation process. While I see your point, I wouldn't buy another unit with the current crossover, too vague. You have only a rough idea where it's set unless you measure it (and most aren't doing that), and it's hard to even be sure both channels are the same (for those who do like dual subs). Maybe overboard for some, but I'd want remote, or at least display setup, no more screwdrivers in the back. |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jul 4, 2016 18:26:05 GMT -5
I could live with no crossover at all in the preamp. I've found that I get the best sub integration with a full range signal driving the speakers and with the subs' plate amp crossovers cutting the subs in at the natural acoustic roll-off frequency of the speakers. This sounds like it would be boomy, but I've found the opposite. Last night, when garbulky came by for a quick listen, he didn't even realize the subs were active until I told him. He thought that the excellent bass was an artifact of the XPA-1s taking iron control of the Axiom M100 speakers! LOL The subs were SO well integrated with the speakers that unless you knew the subs were there, you might not guess. The integration I've got now is better than I've ever experienced with ANY crossover network in the signal chain. For those that need stereo bass management, I'm hoping that Emotiva will eventually offer an outboard crossover (ala the JL Audio CR-1) that will do really good bass management - not just an afterthought, add-on to a preamp. And correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding was that if you actually USED the high-pass crossover of the XPA-1, you lost the advantages of a fully-balanced signal path. Yes, your XLR outputs were still live, but they were no longer fully balanced. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jul 4, 2016 20:05:51 GMT -5
I could live with no crossover at all in the preamp. I've found that I get the best sub integration with a full range signal driving the speakers and with the subs' plate amp crossovers cutting the subs in at the natural acoustic roll-off frequency of the speakers. This sounds like it would be boomy, but I've found the opposite. Mine is set up similar, with the FL and FR speakers at full range, but using the bass management in the XSP-1 for the sub woofer. I set it up firstly with a bit of educated guess work, just reducing the sub frequency until the boomyness disappeared. The FL and FR speakers are rated to 28 hz @ -2db, so start to roll off a bit around 50 hz. So the XSP-1 low pass filter is set around there for the sub to kick in. I'll get around to measuring it one day, when my calibrated microphone comes back. Until then it sounds OK to me. As a result I don't really need to know what frequency the cross over is set at, it's where it sounds best. Whether that's 52 hz or 48 hz I really don't care. It's not like I need the exact cross over point to tell someone else as no two set ups are ever the same. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on Jul 4, 2016 20:13:31 GMT -5
I haven't always used subs (I have two DIY sealed 12" subs) for my two channel audio and I don't use a sub in my current setup unless I'm playing a movie - and the Oppo is in control at that point not the XSP-1. Given the setup I have an HT bypass is very important when it comes to changing things up - the sub crossovers are not used. So I see it a bit different - however I doubt Emotiva is going to drop either of those features on any successor to the XSP-1. If the XSP-1 didn't have HT bypass I'd have kept the Parasound 2100. And it does HT when in standby. Hint to Emo: think about that one.
What I'd like to see is something as capable as the XSP-1 with a DAC with USB/comp hi-res and a couple of optical and coax inputs. IOW a DC-1 or XDA-2 integrated into it. If there is room stuff the XPA-200 into it and I'll be first on the order list. Oh yeah - some room correction software might be nice too!
I like integrated amps - its a one box solution as long as it gets a DAC. I find an external DAC to be a PITA. The more integration the fewer remotes to juggle!
As far as the question by boom about a new XSP-2/3 I have to ask - what is the XSP-1 not doing right? I love this thing. It just works. And that's all I'm ever looking for.
I think I'm close...
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jul 4, 2016 20:22:27 GMT -5
And correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding was that if you actually USED the high-pass crossover of the XPA-1, you lost the advantages of a fully-balanced signal path. Yes, your XLR outputs were still live, but they were no longer fully balanced. That's also my understanding. From the XSP-1 Manual; But, there is room for confusion; Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jul 4, 2016 20:24:37 GMT -5
And correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding was that if you actually USED the high-pass crossover of the XPA-1, you lost the advantages of a fully-balanced signal path. Yes, your XLR outputs were still live, but they were no longer fully balanced. Correct, mentioned in garbulky's first post, bass management or tone controls, either made the signal unbalanced. That should be corrected in an updated unit. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jul 4, 2016 20:36:54 GMT -5
What I am thinking about is a nice preamp. No digital circuitry. Just do the sound amazingly well. Overbuilt. Dual mono, class A circuitry. An XSP-1 is "quad mono", dual differential circuits for each channel  Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jul 4, 2016 20:42:12 GMT -5
Correct, mentioned in garbulky's first post, bass management or tone controls, either made the signal unbalanced. That should be corrected in an updated unit. We can use the tone controls, but they are disengaged when "Direct" mode is selected. Which at the same time facilitates the Differential Reference circuitry if the FL & FR outputs are set to full range. Cheers Gary |
|
