|
|
Post by Axis on Dec 31, 2016 13:28:31 GMT -5
How ? What sound and how much quality ? Nothing against you Garbulky but I don't think anyone here could tell the difference between the USP-1 and the XSP-1. The new BasX gear sounds as good as the XSP. All this gear that is discussed here sounds good and if you hear a difference ok, but different does not make it better. Have fun and listen and discuss and listen and discuss and have fun. A USP-1 sounds great everyone. No offence to anyone who owns the gear of course. And my impressions are my own. Not everybody will find it to be true. The improvements I think possible are in my post above. The DC-1 has the most transparency as a preamp including bass and treble. The XSP-1 improves over the USP-1 on top to bottom tone and transparency. I find myself preferring the DC-1 fully balanced direct to the amps over the other two in to XPA-1 (XLR). I find myself preferring the XSP-1 when running it in to a UPA-2 (RCA) due to the impression of more dynamic slam like with drums and stuff. Garbulky, perfect answer just as long as you think mine was also. |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Dec 31, 2016 13:31:31 GMT -5
I don't know, you guys. The USP-1, though I liked my time with it, can be bettered in sound quality imo. How ? What sound and how much quality ? Nothing against you Garbulky but I don't think anyone here could tell the difference between the USP-1 and the XSP-1. The new BasX gear sounds as good as the XSP. All this gear that is discussed here sounds good and if you hear a difference ok, but different does not make it better. Have fun and listen and discuss and listen and discuss and have fun. A USP-1 sounds great everyone. When I had the USP-1, my only complaint was the relative insensitivity of the volume control to make nuanced increases or decreases. Otherwise it was an excellent unit. As I recall, when it was first released the impressions of those in the Lounge were highly favorable, with the word "neutral" being a common denominator. It was highly praised and rightly so. Then when the XSP-1 debuted, people said it was a step up from the USP-1 in sound quality. Now how can that be? How can something be even more neutral than neutral? I've owned both and thought both were excellent and though I did not have both at the same time to compare, nothing ever gave me the impression that they sounded different from each other. The XSP-1 is the more versatile unit and it had a better volume control but sound quality-wise, I wouldn't be able to tell one from the other. A common comment from people is to describe an improvement as a "widened soundstage." Soundstage is just an illusion produced by the recording as to where the voices and instruments are placed, and also the ambience of the performance environment. It is what it is. How can any decent audio equipment alter this and make it wider? And why does wider equate to better? An audio chain ought to just reproduce whatever is on the source material. I can understand there being tonal differences but differences in where the instruments are located? That sounds like one or more devices is flawed. I'm not talking about speakers because those certainly can affect the way you hear a recording, but I'm talking about the electronics like the DAC, preamp and amp. I say the great majority of the time with competent gear, any differences you hear are due to non-level matched listening. Just a .5-1db difference can give the illusion of a wider soundstage or fuller midrange or whatever, often being whatever the listener wants to hear. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Dec 31, 2016 13:50:31 GMT -5
No offence to anyone who owns the gear of course. And my impressions are my own. Not everybody will find it to be true. The improvements I think possible are in my post above. The DC-1 has the most transparency as a preamp including bass and treble. The XSP-1 improves over the USP-1 on top to bottom tone and transparency. I find myself preferring the DC-1 fully balanced direct to the amps over the other two in to XPA-1 (XLR). I find myself preferring the XSP-1 when running it in to a UPA-2 (RCA) due to the impression of more dynamic slam like with drums and stuff. Garbulky, perfect answer just as long as you think mine was also. I do. I think it's important for people to be honest with their opinions and while doing so having respect for others. I have no problem with somebody finding different to mine or disagreeing etc. Their audio experience is valid!  I read some reviews on cables here. And though I have maybe imagined some subtle differences here and there I didn't see any kind of cable being a must have purchase. I use the cheapest thickest thing I can get. My previous stuff was from Walmart. My current stuff is probably more expensive but I got them free and I don't really know what they are. I use them because it gives me an extra pair so I could biwire. If there were differences I heard, I likely imagined them. I can't really describe them even if I did hear them. But if somebody heard a worthwhile difference, then I am fine with that and I am glad it's bringing them more musical satisfaction. There aren't a whole lot of us in this hobby and the more the better. No need for division in our lifestyle of enjoyment! Though, and I'm not talking about you here my friend, there needs to be respect when somebody finds the other person wrong. It's okay for one to say they think they're wrong and how they're wrong but not to be rude about it, ya know? |
|
|
|
Post by brubacca on Dec 31, 2016 14:09:18 GMT -5
Schiit does not make anything better than the USP-1 for a preamp. They make all kinds of cool stuff and in cool ways but I do not see anything they make that will do what the USP-1 will do. The USP-1 let's every thing shine through and Schiit don't make anything that makes the sound, sound better. Schiit does have (2) new pre-amp offerings. They do not have the same feature set, but I'd bet Saga and Freya are good competition for the USP-1 and XSP-1. (Unless of coarse you want the phono built in or HT bypass, which the Schiit doesn't have). |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs 
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,093
|
Post by klinemj on Dec 31, 2016 14:12:05 GMT -5
I also liked the xsp-1 over the usp-1...For ability to make more fine volume adjustment and being a little quieter/lower noise floor.
And, shouldn't the thread title be "no schiit schiirlock"?
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by Jean Genie on Dec 31, 2016 15:01:11 GMT -5
I also liked the xsp-1 over the usp-1...For ability to make more fine volume adjustment and being a little quieter/lower noise floor. And, shouldn't the thread title be "no schiit schiirlock"? Mark Perhaps. I also considered "No schiirt, no schoes, no service". |
|
|
|
Post by beardedalbatross on Dec 31, 2016 15:46:11 GMT -5
Schiit does not make anything better than the USP-1 for a preamp. They make all kinds of cool stuff and in cool ways but I do not see anything they make that will do what the USP-1 will do. The USP-1 let's every thing shine through and Schiit don't make anything that makes the sound, sound better. Schiit does have (2) new pre-amp offerings. They do not have the same feature set, but I'd bet Saga and Freya are good competition for the USP-1 and XSP-1. (Unless of coarse you want the phono built in or HT bypass, which the Schiit doesn't have). The big draw of the emotiva units for me personally is having real bass management with high and low-pass filters which the schiit doesn't have either. |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Dec 31, 2016 15:51:16 GMT -5
Schiit does not make anything better than the USP-1 for a preamp. They make all kinds of cool stuff and in cool ways but I do not see anything they make that will do what the USP-1 will do. The USP-1 let's every thing shine through and Schiit don't make anything that makes the sound, sound better. Schiit does have (2) new pre-amp offerings. They do not have the same feature set, but I'd bet Saga and Freya are good competition for the USP-1 and XSP-1. (Unless of coarse you want the phono built in or HT bypass, which the Schiit doesn't have). The new Schiit preamps are pretty basic, nowhere near the flexibility of the Emo preamps, but their draw is the active mode that utilizes tubes. I'd say in terms of performance and quality, you can't go wrong with either company's offerings but it comes down to what are you looking for in a preamp. Having had the USP-1, XSP-1 and now the Saga, I'd say the Saga fits my needs the best but performance-wise they are all excellent. And if I had a balanced amp I'd be telling you about the Freya soon, too (it is only now just getting to the first buyers today) but I don't have a balanced amp.  |
|
|
|
Post by gzubeck on Dec 31, 2016 17:02:09 GMT -5
im using the sys. any questions? Just the original -How's it compare to the USP-1? Dont know but i do know that for an attenuator the sys is very neutral. your not going to get any active preamping to drive your amp. so if you dont have enough volume to push your amp you might be missing something. for me its working. there are two inputs that you can switch back and forth and one of them sounds louder than the other so.... |
|
|
|
Post by gzubeck on Dec 31, 2016 17:05:09 GMT -5
Schiit does not make anything better than the USP-1 for a preamp. They make all kinds of cool stuff and in cool ways but I do not see anything they make that will do what the USP-1 will do. The USP-1 let's every thing shine through and Schiit don't make anything that makes the sound, sound better. The saga and freya are now available so i dont know about this...maybe usp-1 has more features than the schiit preamps. |
|
|
|
Post by kewlmunky on Dec 31, 2016 19:07:53 GMT -5
A side note about the SYS, in case you may go with it. If you use it for a single input and two outputs, it's recommended to keep the volume on it maxed out. I never noticed this on mine, but on my brother's I could tell with his Airmotiv 5s monitors that when the volume was below about 10 'o' clock the bass seemed to drop off. He contacted Schiit about it and they said that's why they recommend having the volume at max when using it for single input and two outputs.
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jan 1, 2017 2:44:51 GMT -5
Remember that a passive preamp like the Schiit Sys is just that - a passive unit. On one hand there is transparency to be had going passive. But there are matching considerations, length of wire used etc.
I used a passive preamp once and I found the transparency nice (in some aspects) but on the other hand, it had a slight roll off on the top end and a bit of a bloat on the bass. The impedance of the unit was also possibly too high, so that may have contributed to the coloration.
|
|
|
|
Post by Axis on Jan 1, 2017 9:21:55 GMT -5
Schiit does not make anything better than the USP-1 for a preamp. They make all kinds of cool stuff and in cool ways but I do not see anything they make that will do what the USP-1 will do. The USP-1 let's every thing shine through and Schiit don't make anything that makes the sound, sound better. Schiit does have (2) new pre-amp offerings. They do not have the same feature set, but I'd bet Saga and Freya are good competition for the USP-1 and XSP-1. (Unless of coarse you want the phono built in or HT bypass, which the Schiit doesn't have). People can argue until they are blue in the face over who said what and who killed who. I will not be one to go out and buy every piece of gear to try to find out. I did that already years ago. There is some very good gear out there now. It is not hard to get incredibly great sound from gear that is not thousands of dollars. If you like Schiit gear and it sounds good to you, your in good company. I bought my Emotiva pre, amp and cd player when they first came out many years ago and have not desired any better sound quality. All three pieces @ around $1300 and I am set with good solid state sound until it dies. Of course the "Saga and Freya are good competition for the USP-1 and XSP-1" but they are not the USP-1 and XSP-1. The USP-1 and XSP-1 provide features that neither the Saga and Freya offer. You may not need or want the features on the USP-1 and XSP-1 but if you do, the XSP-1 for $850 will set you up with very high quality gear and sound. |
|
