|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jul 6, 2016 22:04:59 GMT -5
Talk about thread explosion. Wow, i go away half a day and this! Better is such a subjective term. Better, yes. Better at same or lower price... No. Let me throw a wrench in there. A DC-1 connected to XPA-1's .... better direct using its own preamp than with the XSP-1. That's a twist, you used to argue the opposite, that the DAC alone did not sound as good – not as dynamic I think were your terms. At the time I felt there was no need for a preamp with a good DAC/Preamp and digital sources. |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Jul 6, 2016 22:14:39 GMT -5
Let me throw a wrench in there. A DC-1 connected to XPA-1's .... better direct using its own preamp than with the XSP-1. That's a twist, you used to argue the opposite, that the DAC alone did not sound as good – not as dynamic I think were your terms. At the time I felt there was no need for a preamp with a good DAC/Preamp and digital sources. I still believe the DC-1 shines much more with the XSP-1 in the chain! Its transformed the XMC-1 into a great piece of gear. Basically, I believe they (Emotiva) slapped those two together and made something wonderful all in one package! |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jul 6, 2016 22:15:27 GMT -5
Let me throw a wrench in there. A DC-1 connected to XPA-1's .... better direct using its own preamp than with the XSP-1. That's a twist, you used to argue the opposite, that the DAC alone did not sound as good – not as dynamic I think were your terms. At the time I felt there was no need for a preamp with a good DAC/Preamp and digital sources. (Subjective observations) This is correct. Now for a lower powered amp like the UPA-2 the XSP-1 was better. But with the XPA-1 the sound was clearer and had more detail. So far it's the best preamp I've heard in terms of accuracy. The DC-1 however still isn't perfect going direct being mid-range tipped in tonal balance (by a little bit). I feel a dedicated preamp may help like it has in the past just one with more resolving capability. Don't get me wrong the XSP-1 has good resolution. Just not that last bit. Interestingly the XMC-1 had good tonal balance bass to treble in my opinon with lots of dynamic power. However it didn't have all the dimensionality of the DC-1. It sounded different in the treble - subtle but not to my preference. |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Jul 6, 2016 23:12:08 GMT -5
The OP wrote: " Does ANY preamp / processor sound better than Emotiva's" Boomzilla , the poll (currently) has 7 Yes and 8 No. Given this is an informed audience at the lounge, this surely speaks volumes? Can ya hear it? sounds good..  the poll is missing an important factor .. for what price... don't think you can beat emo for the price... Define "sounds good."  |
|
hemster
Global Moderator 
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,952
|
Post by hemster on Jul 6, 2016 23:21:06 GMT -5
The OP wrote: " Does ANY preamp / processor sound better than Emotiva's" Boomzilla , the poll (currently) has 7 Yes and 8 No. Given this is an informed audience at the lounge, this surely speaks volumes? Can ya hear it? sounds good.. the poll is missing an important factor .. for what price... don't think you can beat emo for the price... I think the OP is saying "at any price"... Not only can you not beat Emo for the price, you can't for "...and then some"! But hey, if you have a few shekels burning a hole in your pocket, then by all means, spend it! We need people to keep stimulating the economy. |
|
hemster
Global Moderator
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,952
|
Post by hemster on Jul 6, 2016 23:26:58 GMT -5
Let me throw a wrench in there. A DC-1 connected to XPA-1's .... better direct using its own preamp than with the XSP-1. That's a twist, you used to argue the opposite, that the DAC alone did not sound as good – not as dynamic I think were your terms. At the time I felt there was no need for a preamp with a good DAC/Preamp and digital sources. That's what I recall as well. But maybe he has read some more marketing literature since! Or maybe the wind just changed direction.  |
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Jul 7, 2016 1:12:42 GMT -5
That's a twist, you used to argue the opposite, that the DAC alone did not sound as good – not as dynamic I think were your terms. At the time I felt there was no need for a preamp with a good DAC/Preamp and digital sources. That's what I recall as well. But maybe he has read some more marketing literature since! Or maybe the wind just changed direction. Or maybe because removing an entire device from the signal path really did clean it up a tiny bit. I do believe that removing the additional capacitance of the cabling, internal wiring, circuitry, relays (and so on) from the path can make an audible difference. Maybe that difference, albeit ever so subtle, is noticeable. That doesn't make the DC-1 a better preamp versus the XSP-1, but rather simply proves that the more "direct" the path, the cleaner the signal... |
|
hemster
Global Moderator
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,952
|
Post by hemster on Jul 7, 2016 1:23:03 GMT -5
That's what I recall as well. But maybe he has read some more marketing literature since! Or maybe the wind just changed direction. Or maybe because removing an entire device from the signal path really did clean it up a tiny bit. I do believe that removing the additional capacitance of the cabling, internal wiring, circuitry, relays (and so on) from the path can make an audible difference. Maybe that difference, albeit ever so subtle, is noticeable. That doesn't make the DC-1 a better preamp versus the XSP-1, but rather simply proves that the more "direct" the path, the cleaner the signal... Look, I'm not disagreeing with the notion of a direct path. But when people change their stance completely, I'm sure you agree that it calls into question their credibility. As for the most direct path, remove everything! Just start singing and you'll have a clean signal. Based on one's singing prowess the signal will be to continue or to stop singing.  |
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Jul 7, 2016 1:52:51 GMT -5
As to the "poll", I have to vote NO. Sorry, but there has to be a quantifier and if I have to make up my own, it will have to be an "apples to apples" comparison based on a comparative price, targeted markets and those that I have first-hand experience with. Over the past 20 years, I've personally owned dedicated 2 channel analog preamps from Marantz, NAD and Parasound and none of the three sounded better than my two Emotiva offerings (XSP-1 or USP-1). Of course, since none of the three lived in the same "exact" system, in the same room at the same time, it's all irrelevant anyway...  |
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Jul 7, 2016 1:56:42 GMT -5
Or maybe because removing an entire device from the signal path really did clean it up a tiny bit. I do believe that removing the additional capacitance of the cabling, internal wiring, circuitry, relays (and so on) from the path can make an audible difference. Maybe that difference, albeit ever so subtle, is noticeable. That doesn't make the DC-1 a better preamp versus the XSP-1, but rather simply proves that the more "direct" the path, the cleaner the signal... Look, I'm not disagreeing with the notion of a direct path. But when people change their stance completely, I'm sure you agree that it calls into question their credibility. As for the most direct path, remove everything! Just start singing and you'll have a clean signal. Based on one's singing prowess the signal will be to continue or to stop singing. Oh good Lord Hemster.... You don't want to hear "me" singing. I love to sing, but only when the volume is cranked..... |
|
|
|
Post by Axis on Jul 7, 2016 2:30:10 GMT -5
I do not think you can get better preamps and amps for the price than Emotiva. Now there are equally very good preamps and amps out there and I am sure someone could link a couple out there that do not cost a whole lot and perform good.
I said recently that I think a DC-1 should be paired with powered monitors. It was made with the ideal that it would fit nicely at a professionals mixing station and take a good digital source and keep it clean and noise free to there monitors. You can use a DC-1 all kinds of ways but it takes mainly digital sources and uses balance topography to keep out noise. It has a single ended analog input for that off analog source but if you are going to use analog as the main source a DC-1 in not the best choice for that duty.
So you went and bought two XPA-1's (Not talking about anyone particular). Sounds to me you are going to be driving a couple speakers that can play loud and low and reproduce the signal very precise. Other wise your spending more than you should for your system. Your money though.
XSP-1 or DC-1 for those XPA-1's ? Right now, both.
The XSP-1 is made for a two channel analog system. Here is a bullet point from the Features page of the XSP-1.
•Exceptional sound quality via an all-analog, fully balanced, differential signal path with vanishingly low noise and distortion.
Now a bullet point from the Features page of the XPA-1.
•Fully discrete, fully balanced, Differential Reference™ design.
The XSP-1 has 2 sets of balanced inputs and one set of balanced main outputs. This sounds like what you would need and want for a two channel Home Reference analog system. Something that mates with the XPA-1's and keeps that analog signal free of any noise and using the XPA-1's free of signal crosstalk.
Now say you have a digital source you want to feed to those XPA-1's. Do you go from the digital source to the DC-1 and then the XSP-1 ? You can and guess what the analog output on the DC-1 is balanced analog audio. Can you use that DC-1 strait to the XPA-1's ? Sure can.
|
|
|
|
Post by Axis on Jul 7, 2016 4:43:59 GMT -5
Should the XSP-1 have more features ?
The XSP-1 already has about every feature you could want from a component preamp. Someone said it is too tall, but it needs to be tall. Find me another preamp that has all that the XSP-1 has. It is part of the X series and the X series is components with size no issue.
Should the XSP-1 have digital ?
No. Again the XSP-1 is a X series component that does one thing very well. Analog !
Ok there was the X series XDA digital component but if you ask me I was never impressed with it. It was ok for the price but I kind of thought is was not what I would want to pair with the XSP-1. The DC-1 is an outstanding DAC but not the component I would want to install along with the XSP-1 and a couple of XPA-1's in my X series component Home Reference two channel system. It would work great but form factor is important in a component system. Seems to me Emotiva is and has been missing the digital component for the X series. I think it should be as outstanding as the DC-1 and more so. I will not go into detail on what features it could have to compliment the XSP-1 but it should do just that and do it well. It should be an X series component that provides size no issue for functions and that same balanced topography that the XSP-1 and XPA-1's provide.
Last thought goes to something we all have heard all our lives.
If it is not broke, do not fix it !
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jul 7, 2016 5:55:29 GMT -5
Well, a significant minority of voters DO think that there's better sound available (albeit, at apparently higher prices). No, the higher priced preamps don't offer all the functions of the XSP-1, nor do they offer the value. But the voting does put lie to the idea that "any engineering student can put together a world-class preamp for $10 of parts." Apparently, there's more to it than that...
This is NOT a slap at XSP-1 owners. I concur that the preamp is the best sounding and most feature-laden preamp within anywhere of 2x its price range. If you need the features, you can't do better. If you're satisfied with the sound quality in reference mode (and it IS very, very good), then you'll find no comparably-priced competition. Emotiva obviously sells plenty of them, and they should.
It's also apparent that the majority feel that the XSP-1's sound quality is already "good enough," and that no additional improvements are needed. So be it. Everyone votes with their own wallet, and mine won't be paying for any more XSP-1s. Your money - your choice.
There are a few places in the audio system where I, personally, think that spending a few or more extra dollars pays audible dividends. The preamp is one of those areas. If you're running a phono system (I'm not), then the phono cartridge is another area where I wouldn't skimp. The speakers, however, aren't a place where I'd spend that much. At one time, the prevailing advice was to spend 50% of your budget on speakers, and the rest on everything else. But these days, there are so many really excellent cheap speakers on the market, that I'd resist that sage advice. In today's market, I'd think that 30% on speakers would buy one far more performance than 50% would decades ago. But these are but my humble speculations, and, as always, I could be wrong.
So far as preamps, the majority disagree with me, but after all - this IS the Emotiva Lounge...
|
|
|
|
Post by brubacca on Jul 7, 2016 6:19:44 GMT -5
Just curious Boom have you ever listened to any of the British gear? Specifically Naim or Rega, but in extension Meridian or Linn.
They seem to voice their gear differently with less attention to detail and more attention to the musical flow. I don't know how else to explain.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cogito on Jul 7, 2016 6:32:45 GMT -5
Just curious Boom have you ever listened to any of the British gear? Specifically Naim or Rega, but in extension Meridian or Linn. They seem to voice their gear differently with less attention to detail and more attention to the musical flow. I don't know how else to explain. What is "musical flow"? |
|
|
|
Post by Axis on Jul 7, 2016 6:44:00 GMT -5
Boom the Audio Research Reference 6 tube line stage preamplifier is $14,000. Audio Research just came out with a new tube line stage preamplifier the LS 28 for $7500. Boom, would you spend $14,000 for the Ref 6 if you compared the two and preferred the sound of the Ref 6 to the LS 28 or would you except the LS 28 if the sound was very good ? I ask because I wonder how far you and others here are prepared to go to get what you want. There are many that can afford the Ref 10 at $30,000 like many here can afford the XSP-1. Audio Research is great audio gear but priced for a different customer than would normally be an Emotiva customer. If someone comes here searching for a preamp and say they have tried and do not like the XSP-1, I would not be steering them to Audio Research. Maybe NAD or something like that. Boom, where do you think you will go next with a preamp ? Watching with excitement ! |
|
|
|
Post by brubacca on Jul 7, 2016 7:04:26 GMT -5
Just curious Boom have you ever listened to any of the British gear? Specifically Naim or Rega, but in extension Meridian or Linn. They seem to voice their gear differently with less attention to detail and more attention to the musical flow. I don't know how else to explain. What is "musical flow"? I really don't know how to explain. The way they color their sound it is more fun and exciting to listen to. The classic description is PRaT, Pace, Rhythym and Timing. Some think that description is BS. I can tell you that when I had my USP-1, UPA-200 and XDA-1 I heard a Naim Nait 1 with Rega Apollo-R and the systems sounded very different. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jul 7, 2016 7:22:57 GMT -5
That's a twist, you used to argue the opposite, that the DAC alone did not sound as good – not as dynamic I think were your terms. At the time I felt there was no need for a preamp with a good DAC/Preamp and digital sources. That's what I recall as well. But maybe he has read some more marketing literature since! Or maybe the wind just changed direction. I just heard different! I swears! But I'm still siding towards the need for a good preamp! I've also heard the XPA-1 direct without a preamp in another system and imo the preamp in the DAC unit could be improved. Right now the sound is very tight with the DC-1. And though the sound is tipped towards the mid-range the bass is very tight and clear and also feels extended. |
|
|
|
Post by Cogito on Jul 7, 2016 7:26:37 GMT -5
Well, a significant minority of voters DO think that there's better sound available (albeit, at apparently higher prices). No, the higher priced preamps don't offer all the functions of the XSP-1, nor do they offer the value. But the voting does put lie to the idea that "any engineering student can put together a world-class preamp for $10 of parts." Apparently, there's more to it than that... This is NOT a slap at XSP-1 owners. I concur that the preamp is the best sounding and most feature-laden preamp within anywhere of 2x its price range. If you need the features, you can't do better. If you're satisfied with the sound quality in reference mode (and it IS very, very good), then you'll find no comparably-priced competition. Emotiva obviously sells plenty of them, and they should. It's also apparent that the majority feel that the XSP-1's sound quality is already "good enough," and that no additional improvements are needed. So be it. Everyone votes with their own wallet, and mine won't be paying for any more XSP-1s. Your money - your choice. There are a few places in the audio system where I, personally, think that spending a few or more extra dollars pays audible dividends. The preamp is one of those areas. If you're running a phono system (I'm not), then the phono cartridge is another area where I wouldn't skimp. The speakers, however, aren't a place where I'd spend that much. At one time, the prevailing advice was to spend 50% of your budget on speakers, and the rest on everything else. But these days, there are so many really excellent cheap speakers on the market, that I'd resist that sage advice. In today's market, I'd think that 30% on speakers would buy one far more performance than 50% would decades ago. But these are but my humble speculations, and, as always, I could be wrong. So far as preamps, the majority disagree with me, but after all - this IS the Emotiva Lounge... When it comes to preamps, power amps, DACs and other electronics, I don't really audition them. Instead, I rely on things like build quality, published specs, professional reviews, features and ultimately, price. Yes, I am a believer that most well made/engineered electronics pretty much sound the same. With the exception of my current main speakers, I typically audition the sh** out of them before I make a purchase (I took a chance and bought them because of the rave reviews they received). The variances between speakers are a magnitude larger than the differences between electronics, and how they interact with your listening space is absolutely critical (This is a NON issue with electronics). IMO Speakers are the MOST important part of a system, buy the best you can afford. If you can, choose your speakers first and build your system around them. After all, it's the speakers that have the direct interaction with your ears, not the electronics. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jul 7, 2016 7:31:52 GMT -5
Or maybe because removing an entire device from the signal path really did clean it up a tiny bit. I do believe that removing the additional capacitance of the cabling, internal wiring, circuitry, relays (and so on) from the path can make an audible difference. Maybe that difference, albeit ever so subtle, is noticeable. That doesn't make the DC-1 a better preamp versus the XSP-1, but rather simply proves that the more "direct" the path, the cleaner the signal... Look, I'm not disagreeing with the notion of a direct path. But when people change their stance completely, I'm sure you agree that it calls into question their credibility. I didn't change my stance completely based on some literature hemster . I had a new stance with regards to the XPA-1 and the DC-1 because the XPA-1 was the latest addition. When I added the XPA-1 it sounded quite a bit better than my UPA-2. More resolving capability. The DC-1 with the UPA-2 (and other preamp less systems which had less power) sounded better with the preamp. Quite a bit. I'm just honest with what I hear. If that sounds like it lacks credibility, I guess I could lie and say I didn't hear what I did with this new setup?! My best guess for this is that 1. The DC-1 preamp section is quite good. 2. The other preamps I tried didn't sound as good because they weren't as resolving. If the preamp was better at this, maybe this would not be the case. Doc mentioned something about the legnth of the cables. This could be. I don't know because I am not knowledgeable in that stuff. However I did have issue with cable legnth for the XPA-1. The longer XLR cables for some weird reason dulled the sound (subjective). At least in my specific setup. I don't know if that has something to do with it. It goes against what I feel is correct ( a preamp) but if I heard it, then I heard it. I won't be surprised if the Audio GD HE-1 sounds better with the DC-1 but I haven't heard it. |
|
the poll is missing an important factor .. for what price... 
