|
Post by charlieeco on May 28, 2017 9:22:31 GMT -5
This morning I saw the new BASX A-5175 AMPLIFIER, reading the specs sadly is 175W x 2 channels driven, all channels 125W, I was thinking It was going to be 175 W x 5 channels driven. Waiting for some user reviews that could help.
|
|
geebo
Emo VIPs
"Too bad that all the people who know how to run the country are driving taxicabs and cutting hair"
Posts: 24,188
|
Post by geebo on May 28, 2017 9:45:08 GMT -5
This morning I saw the new BASX A-5175 AMPLIFIER, reading the specs sadly is 175W x 2 channels driven, all channels 125W, I was thinking It was going to be 175 W x 5 channels driven. Waiting for some user reviews that could help. View AttachmentRealistically the difference would only result in about 1.5dB increase in volume and then only if the surrounds and center was pumping out 125w at the same time. So the difference would probably be less than 1dB.
|
|
novisnick
EmoPhile
CEO Secret Monoblock Society
Posts: 27,223
|
Post by novisnick on May 28, 2017 10:07:28 GMT -5
The naming of the unit may confuse some people. Stating tests with two channels driven is the norm but maybe naming the unit a BasX A-5125 would be more consumer friendly. BasX, build level A, for amp 5 for channels 125 for wpc driven Im sure it will do an admirable job driving whatever someone would like. Just my
|
|
|
Post by bolle on May 28, 2017 11:59:37 GMT -5
I do agree. Emo had no need for bragging specs so far and imho shouldn´t start with this now.
|
|
|
Post by teaman on May 28, 2017 13:47:26 GMT -5
When in Rome do as the Romans do. Emotiva is now selling through partners and have adjusted pricing and warranties accordingly. It only makes sense that the next step to transitioning to direct competition with the likes of Pioneer, Denon, Yamaha, Onkyo and the rest of them. The name brands always post their specs into one or two channels only with significantly lower specs posted in the owners manual or not posted at all. I think my Yamaha RX-V2700 was spec'd at 130 wpc x 7 on their site and on the front sticker on the faceplate yet the real world specs are more like 58 wpc into seven channels. I am sure people will jump in with both feet when hearing the specs at a partner audio shop. Oh well.
|
|
novisnick
EmoPhile
CEO Secret Monoblock Society
Posts: 27,223
|
Post by novisnick on May 28, 2017 14:04:26 GMT -5
When in Rome do as the Romans do. Emotiva is now selling through partners and have adjusted pricing and warranties accordingly. It only makes sense that the next step to transitioning to direct competition with the likes of Pioneer, Denon, Yamaha, Onkyo and the rest of them. The name brands always post their specs into one or two channels only with significantly lower specs posted in the owners manual or not posted at all. I think my Yamaha RX-V2700 was spec'd at 130 wpc x 7 on their site and on the front sticker on the faceplate yet the real world specs are more like 58 wpc into seven channels. I am sure people will jump in with both feet when hearing the specs at a partner audio shop. Oh well. Conform rather than lead,,,,,,,
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on May 28, 2017 15:04:45 GMT -5
Finally! Ever since the UPA-1/2/5/7 amps were retired the only amps you could buy from Emotiva if you wanted 100wpc or more, all channels driven, were the 'X' series amps. Great amps for sure, but some of us have bad backs! While the UPA-200/500/700 amps could deliver enough for most audio HT speakers some times people just want 'more'.
My first Emotiva buy was a UPA-7. It took me 3+ years to get the upgrade bug - been sorry ever since that I sold it. It performed flawlessly and had a solid construction that you knew was well built and would last. Will there be an A-1175 - A-2175 and a A-7175 to follow?
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on May 28, 2017 15:15:41 GMT -5
This morning I saw the new BASX A-5175 AMPLIFIER, reading the specs sadly is 175W x 2 channels driven, all channels 125W, I was thinking It was going to be 175 W x 5 channels driven. Waiting for some user reviews that could help. View AttachmentRealistically the difference would only result in about 1.5dB increase in volume and then only if the surrounds and center was pumping out 125w at the same time. So the difference would probably be less than 1dB. Why not just call it a 5300 if it makes so little difference! But....though 5175 is a little misleading...that is simply the name format and it's already confusing. It took me a while to realize what they were getting at with the naming - 5 channels 175 watts. I won't object though. At least they don't use the words a 5 channel X 175 watt amp (implying all channels driven). This is where my problem usually is - where the 2 channel and all channel rating is implied to be the same. They used to on occasion do that and worse hint at it on the gallery section. But not here and now. They appear to have fixed that. Here they haven't claimed it using the words watts and clearly worded the difference in the specs page. It is 2X 175 and 125 watts all channels driven. So I can't really object. Sure they were a smidge naughty with the naming but not that bad really.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 28, 2017 17:10:04 GMT -5
Audio precision data, please :-)
|
|
geebo
Emo VIPs
"Too bad that all the people who know how to run the country are driving taxicabs and cutting hair"
Posts: 24,188
|
Post by geebo on May 28, 2017 17:26:41 GMT -5
Realistically the difference would only result in about 1.5dB increase in volume and then only if the surrounds and center was pumping out 125w at the same time. So the difference would probably be less than 1dB. Why not just call it a 5300 if it makes so little difference! But....though 5175 is a little misleading...that is simply the name format and it's already confusing. It took me a while to realize what they were getting at with the naming - 5 channels 175 watts. I won't object though. At least they don't use the words a 5 channel X 175 watt amp (implying all channels driven). This is where my problem usually is - where the 2 channel and all channel rating is implied to be the same. They used to on occasion do that and worse hint at it on the gallery section. But not here and now. They appear to have fixed that. Here they haven't claimed it using the words watts and clearly worded the difference in the specs page. It is 2X 175 and 125 watts all channels driven. So I can't really object. Sure they were a smidge naughty with the naming but not that bad really. They could name it the 4738.719 as far as I'm concerned. Just sayin' the difference between 175 and 125 is a lot less than many people think. Pretty much inconsequential in real world use.
|
|
|
Post by teaman on May 28, 2017 17:58:11 GMT -5
Realistically the difference would only result in about 1.5dB increase in volume and then only if the surrounds and center was pumping out 125w at the same time. So the difference would probably be less than 1dB. Why not just call it a 5300 if it makes so little difference! But....though 5175 is a little misleading...that is simply the name format and it's already confusing. It took me a while to realize what they were getting at with the naming - 5 channels 175 watts. I won't object though. At least they don't use the words a 5 channel X 175 watt amp (implying all channels driven). This is where my problem usually is - where the 2 channel and all channel rating is implied to be the same. They used to on occasion do that and worse hint at it on the gallery section. But not here and now. They appear to have fixed that. Here they haven't claimed it using the words watts and clearly worded the difference in the specs page. It is 2X 175 and 125 watts all channels driven. So I can't really object. Sure they were a smidge naughty with the naming but not that bad really. I agree with you gar, I just don't know why Emotiva didn't stay in line with every other amp. They could have easily named it the 5125 and everyone would have accepted that and known exactly what the amp was. Oh well, who cares I don't need one!
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,746
|
Post by klinemj on May 28, 2017 18:01:01 GMT -5
of course we all know the XPA-1 has 1 watt, the XPA-3 has 3, and so on... Yep, they should stick with tradition... Mark
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 28, 2017 18:48:51 GMT -5
of course we all know the XPA-1 has 1 watt, the XPA-3 has 3, and so on... Yep, they should stick with tradition... Mark Does UPA stand for something now that I think about it??? Universal power amp? Uppity...undulating.....underling...
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on May 28, 2017 19:16:45 GMT -5
What's really sad is the price tag. $800 is more than the XPA-5 G1, and similar to the XPA-5 G2. sigh....I miss those days...
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on May 28, 2017 19:21:07 GMT -5
When in Rome do as the Romans do. Emotiva is now selling through partners and have adjusted pricing and warranties accordingly. It only makes sense that the next step to transitioning to direct competition with the likes of Pioneer, Denon, Yamaha, Onkyo and the rest of them. The name brands always post their specs into one or two channels only with significantly lower specs posted in the owners manual or not posted at all. I think my Yamaha RX-V2700 was spec'd at 130 wpc x 7 on their site and on the front sticker on the faceplate yet the real world specs are more like 58 wpc into seven channels. I am sure people will jump in with both feet when hearing the specs at a partner audio shop. Oh well. I agree with what you're saying about competing with the big corporations. Emotiva needs to quit producing holes in the lineup if they want to be mentioned with the likes of Yamaha Denon etc. For how long did we not see a single passive speaker offering other than in-wall/in-ceiling? A serious all around audio company needs to keep the product pipeline stocked with everything - not just amps. This isn't a criticism of Emotiva - just pointing out the obvious - which I'm sure Dan & Co. are well aware of. I recall when the decision to end the UPA-1/2/5/7 amps came down. The reasoning was that few prospective buyers were going to buy a 5 or 7 channel amp that 'appeared' to have very little more power than the average receiver - which we know isn't so, but that was that. Then they brought out the UPA-500/700 amps. At least the UPA-200 had similar power to the amp it replaced - the UPA-2. I just thought that was kind of odd after the explanation of why the UPA-1/2/5/8 was halted.
|
|
|
Post by Loop 7 on May 28, 2017 21:35:45 GMT -5
What's really sad is the price tag. $800 is more than the XPA-5 G1, and similar to the XPA-5 G2. sigh....I miss those days... Pricing did surprise me.
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on May 28, 2017 23:38:51 GMT -5
When in Rome do as the Romans do. Emotiva is now selling through partners and have adjusted pricing and warranties accordingly. It only makes sense that the next step to transitioning to direct competition with the likes of Pioneer, Denon, Yamaha, Onkyo and the rest of them. The name brands always post their specs into one or two channels only with significantly lower specs posted in the owners manual or not posted at all. I think my Yamaha RX-V2700 was spec'd at 130 wpc x 7 on their site and on the front sticker on the faceplate yet the real world specs are more like 58 wpc into seven channels. I am sure people will jump in with both feet when hearing the specs at a partner audio shop. Oh well. Conform rather than lead,,,,,,, Yes that is correct. Receiver power is for the most part as a result of having to do everything else. You just are not going to have the reserves to drive the amplifier like a dedicated amplifier would. With the Computers, Tuners, and processors, and much more wanting a cut of the power supply pie, there really is only so much the amplifier stages are going to get. Like being late to a BBQ and what is left? Sad this, but I digress. Receivers will always love the boost an external amplifier can give them. That is why after all they have Preamplifier Outputs for right?
|
|
|
Post by leonski on May 29, 2017 13:22:46 GMT -5
When I was a kid (Cue sappy music) I kind of got used to certain prices. I wanted a 1970 BMW 2002 so bad I could taste it. Price in those days? 3000$ NEW I even remember the last car in the USA you could buy NEW for 2000$ or less. It was a RAMBLER, a brand long-gone.
Prices go up while ones idea of the price seems to stay fixed from some point onward. I know I'm SHOCKED at some prices I see that my young nieces / nephews just pay. This applies to EveryThing. No Exceptions. Food? Utilities? Car prices? Taxes? and for the rest of us, our STEREOS. Walking into a real brick and mortar store maybe 30 years ago with 3000$ is a completely different experience today. Than? complete system. including cables, and a bunch of new CDs. Today? 'What color would you like the faceplate on your new amp?'
I'm not about to try to wade thru the math, but I'm thinking GEEBO is 100%. 125 x 5 VS 175 x 2? With 10 watts per speaker and even 125 watt peaks, I'll bet the 5 channel version gets PLENTY lound. In my last upgrade cycle, I went from 2x500 to 4x200 and frankly think the new setup can go louder.
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on May 30, 2017 8:11:51 GMT -5
When I was a kid (Cue sappy music) I kind of got used to certain prices. I wanted a 1970 BMW 2002 so bad I could taste it. Price in those days? 3000$ NEW I even remember the last car in the USA you could buy NEW for 2000$ or less. It was a RAMBLER, a brand long-gone. Prices go up while ones idea of the price seems to stay fixed from some point onward. I know I'm SHOCKED at some prices I see that my young nieces / nephews just pay. Except the XPA-Gen 2 pricing isn't 47 years ago; is it even 2 years ago they discontinued it? Not to mention the BasX is a step down in their performance line/power and it's made in China just like the XPA's were. I'm sure the real reason for the price increases are because Emo is bigger now than they were before and so they have to make more to cover all their costs. Such is the way of business.
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on May 30, 2017 8:21:02 GMT -5
of course we all know the XPA-1 has 1 watt, the XPA-3 has 3, and so on... Yep, they should stick with tradition... Mark Does UPA stand for something now that I think about it??? Universal power amp? Uppity...undulating.....underling... I believe it was "Ultra" power amplifier.
|
|