|
|
Post by leonski on Oct 24, 2017 2:35:49 GMT -5
Only EMO has what should be reliable statistics on failure rate and cause.
People may tend to report problems in forums while the expected 'good' performance is not.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcz06 on Oct 24, 2017 4:41:07 GMT -5
I have three XPR-1s that I love, they have performed flawlessly.....like most have said the big issue is the weight. However I have owned Parasound HCA-3500 & 2205AT, Anthem P2 and P5....so I am used to heavy amps and luckily have only needed to move them a few times....
|
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Oct 24, 2017 9:18:13 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback everybody! The tally is now 5 out of 15 that had problems of some sort or another, still hovering around 30-40%.
Its sounding like when these are functioning they are fantastic. 33% failure rate seems pretty bad though, both for Emotiva and in general.
|
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Oct 24, 2017 9:21:31 GMT -5
C'mon guys amps are heavy, is 100lbs really that big of a problem? Assuming you don't have to send it in for repair you place it and forget it. A little cross training is good for you haha  . |
|
|
|
Post by jdc on Oct 24, 2017 9:56:45 GMT -5
I've had my XPR-2 for almost 4 years, not one problem. It gets used A LOT, sometimes it may stay on for 12 hours or more. I'll turn it on just to watch Seinfeld  |
|
|
|
Post by jcz06 on Oct 24, 2017 10:05:15 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback everybody! The tally is now 5 out of 15 that had problems of some sort or another, still hovering around 30-40%. Its sounding like when these are functioning they are fantastic. 33% failure rate seems pretty bad though, both for Emotiva and in general. Your sample size isn't very good, so your results aren't very accurate and are very skewed....... |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Oct 24, 2017 10:43:14 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback everybody! The tally is now 5 out of 15 that had problems of some sort or another, still hovering around 30-40%. Its sounding like when these are functioning they are fantastic. 33% failure rate seems pretty bad though, both for Emotiva and in general. Trying to put validity in a statistical sample that comes from postings in the Lounge isn't a good idea. A more valid way would be to measure how many returns or reports of problems Emo has received compared to the number of units that were sold. In the Lounge those who have had problems may be more inclined to post something. If everything is going well for you then there's not as much motivation to say anything about that. |
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Oct 24, 2017 11:23:23 GMT -5
Trying to put validity in a statistical sample that comes from postings in the Lounge isn't a good idea. A more valid way would be to measure how many returns or reports of problems Emo has received compared to the number of units that were sold. Agree; it's exactly what Leonski said above - only data from Emo would be valid to evaluate for statistical purposes. As for XPR being a great value, buy them if you can as nothing else compares for that $$, well.... nothing else compares from a specification standpoint, I agree. But I'm not so sure you can't get something as good or better musically, albeit with lower specs, for less $$ or more warranty. If I wanted to drop $2-3k on amp(s), XPR monoblocks wouldn't top my list. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Oct 24, 2017 11:46:47 GMT -5
And since REAL statistics are not forthcoming, it is also impossible to know the Real Failure Mode, if in common to a statistically common degree.
How many amps got REPEAT fixes?
And nickwin? 100lb of concentrated and somewhat Delicate weight is a PIA to move safely. And ship.
That, IMO is at least one of the reasons for the new SMPS of the G3.
|
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Oct 24, 2017 12:46:19 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback everybody! The tally is now 5 out of 15 that had problems of some sort or another, still hovering around 30-40%. Its sounding like when these are functioning they are fantastic. 33% failure rate seems pretty bad though, both for Emotiva and in general. Trying to put validity in a statistical sample that comes from postings in the Lounge isn't a good idea. A more valid way would be to measure how many returns or reports of problems Emo has received compared to the number of units that were sold. In the Lounge those who have had problems may be more inclined to post something. If everything is going well for you then there's not as much motivation to say anything about that. Hold on, I never implied these failure rates where accurate or truly statisticly sound, im just taking the responses I got and looking at how many of those had issues. Period. Everyone can interpret that info however they want. I’m not digging through the lounge looking for people that commented in the past. Im only counting the people that commented in this thread. The idea that people that have problems are more likely to post is valid but I don’t think that applies here. My intention is not to ruffle feathers, I’m just trying to get a read on this for ME. Short of getting return/repair data from Emotiva (which isn’t going to happen), this is the best I have to go on. You don’t have to agree with me but personally the fact that more and more people are commenting and the % is staying the same says something. I’m not denying these things probably rock when working 100%! I still want one... |
|
harsh
Minor Hero
Posts: 40 
|
Post by harsh on Oct 24, 2017 12:48:11 GMT -5
For the sake of the laws of statistic, one flawless XPR-2 here. 4 years of perfect sound and reliability  |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Oct 24, 2017 12:48:34 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback everybody! The tally is now 5 out of 15 that had problems of some sort or another, still hovering around 30-40%. Its sounding like when these are functioning they are fantastic. 33% failure rate seems pretty bad though, both for Emotiva and in general. Your sample size isn't very good, so your results aren't very accurate and are very skewed....... Based on your own logic we have no way of knowing if this data is skewed or not. All we know is that it’s not truly statistically sound. That said we are half way to a statistically sound sample size of 30! |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Oct 24, 2017 12:50:20 GMT -5
Sorry guys, I guess I'm a little argumentative today lol. I can’t walk away from a debate...
I mean no offense and appreciate the feedback!
|
|
|
|
Post by simpleman68 on Oct 24, 2017 12:55:54 GMT -5
Sorry guys, I guess in a little argumentative today lol. I can’t walk away from a debate... I mean no offense and appreciate the feedback! heh heh |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Oct 24, 2017 13:04:22 GMT -5
Trying to put validity in a statistical sample that comes from postings in the Lounge isn't a good idea. A more valid way would be to measure how many returns or reports of problems Emo has received compared to the number of units that were sold. In the Lounge those who have had problems may be more inclined to post something. If everything is going well for you then there's not as much motivation to say anything about that. Hold on, I never implied these failure rates where accurate or truly statisticly sound, im just taking the responses I got and looking at how many of those had issues. Period. Everyone can interpret that info however they want. I’m not digging through the lounge looking for people that commented in the past. Im only counting the people that commented in this thread. The idea that people that have problems are more likely to post is valid but I don’t think that applies here. My intention is not to ruffle feathers, I’m just trying to get a read on this for ME. Short of getting return/repair data from Emotiva (which isn’t going to happen), this is the best I have to go on. You don’t have to agree with me but personally the fact that more and more people are commenting and the % is staying the same says something. I’m not denying these things probably rock when working 100%! But you are implying your results are statistically sound when you say "33% failure rate." That is from a skewed sample. You also posted in a different post that increasing the sample size to 30 would make it "statistically sound" but not necessarily. |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Oct 24, 2017 13:15:37 GMT -5
I get what your saying but I think anyone that read all my posts in this thread the would realize I’m just tallying the responses in this thread. Of course you can’t apply this small sample to all XPRs and expect it to be 100% accurate.
I’m just going by what I was taught in college statistics, which is that you need a sample of 30 or more to be technically statically sound. A bigger sample size always results in more accurate data but 30 is statistically sound. In regard to HRC remember that statiscs can’t tell you an outcome, just the probability of various outcomes. If I remember that right ...
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Oct 24, 2017 13:18:41 GMT -5
Your sample size isn't very good, so your results aren't very accurate and are very skewed....... Based on your own logic we have no way of knowing if this data is skewed or not. All we know is that it’s not truly statistically sound. That said we are half way to a statistically sound sample size of 30! Data, if I can elevate it to that level, when taken in the manner of this survey, is ALWAYS Skewed. What you have are maybe 20 Anecdotes. IMO, the Best Data is still held closely by EMO. And you have to look at it to another level. Let's say just for the sake of discussion that a certain capacitor in the PS was found to be causing problems in early production samples. Returns were running high. BUT, when the problem was isolated to 'root', the part was upgraded and No More issues were detected. So? You have to look at returns OVER TIME and for cause. IF the data presented is accurate, it is by Accident. A Statistical Fluke, if you will. Me? I'd rather dig thru the DATA and look at some control charts and history of revisions to the amp(s) in question. Yes, we'd not print a control chart until we had 20 clean runs on a machine. That's a pretty good number. Trouble is? The 'Data' thus far collected is NOT random but self-selected. And while you are plotting this 'chart' of failures, don't forget to apply some rules. analyse-it.com/docs/user-guide/processcontrol/shewhartcontrolchartrulesI'm not certain how to apply such control chart rules to what is essentially a go / no-go situation of 'broken' or 'good'. |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Oct 24, 2017 13:24:08 GMT -5
Now when a good samaritan Teaman has a 50% warning that makes me question the authorities.  |
|
|
|
Post by assy74 on Oct 24, 2017 13:26:15 GMT -5
I have a xpr-5 bought it second hand. Think it is prox 4 years and have worked perfect like someone has said, the sound is a bit laid back with insane bass..... Two danish brands, dynaudio and system audio sounded good with my xpr-5 and xmc... Have a Norwegian brand now, Arendasound and it sounds very nice |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Oct 24, 2017 13:26:38 GMT -5
Fair enough, but do we have anything better to go on? Me? I'd rather dig thru the DATA and look at some control charts and history of revisions to the amp(s) in question. Agreed. I would love to see this too if available. |
|
.
