hemster
Global Moderator 
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,952
|
Post by hemster on Dec 19, 2017 0:39:20 GMT -5
For Pete's sake, can we drop this whole malarkey about the number of output devices? It is irrelevant. As is the size of the power supply when comparing toroidal transformers to SMPS components. Chalk and cheese. Bananas and oranges..
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Dec 19, 2017 10:14:35 GMT -5
For Pete's sake, can we drop this whole malarkey about the number of output devices? It is irrelevant. As is the size of the power supply when comparing toroidal transformers to SMPS components. Chalk and cheese. Bananas and oranges.. If I acknowledge readily that different output devices are different, and different devices are hard to compare to each other...can we talk about output devices? I think output devices make a difference. And it just so happens the XPA-1 gen 2 has a schiit ton of them and ALL the other emo amps before them in the lineup had progressively less. Unless Emotiva compeltely redesigned their output devices and blades to now take up (what looks to be ) half the size and by extrapolation twice the output for the size, I don't think it's unreasonable to talk about it and wonder if they are the same. Even better, if they are different....tell us all about it! That's exciting news! Which ones are they? What components do they use? How many are there? What kind of differences did they make? Are they more efficient? Are they more powerful? |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Dec 19, 2017 12:01:12 GMT -5
For Pete's sake, can we drop this whole malarkey about the number of output devices? It is irrelevant. As is the size of the power supply when comparing toroidal transformers to SMPS components. Chalk and cheese. Bananas and oranges.. The ultimate criteria ought to be does a component sound good or not good. If it sounds good then you may wonder about its innards and the theory behind it (or maybe you won't wonder because all you care about is how does it sound). But it seems so often that the criteria now is to find out what the innards are because that will tell your ears if it sounds good or bad. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,274
|
Post by KeithL on Dec 19, 2017 13:07:24 GMT -5
Absolutely...... but you're not analyzing the situation far enough. Most humans are subject to "expectation bias" to some degree or another (some of us more than others). This means that we tend to hear what we expect to hear... subconsciously. Note that it doesn't FORCE you to hear or not hear anything - it's just a bias. For example, a lot of people can tell the difference between good wine and not so good wine.... and bias probably won't make them unable to taste that difference. However, if you put the same wine in two bottles, making the reality that there is no difference at all, most people will tend to imagine that the bottle with the bigger price tag tastes better. With nothing else to go on, and no actual difference to taste, the bias is enough to "tip the scales". (Of course, the guy who really likes bargains just might imagine that the cheaper bottle tasted better.) A similar bias convinces many people that "an amplifier with a big heavy toroidal transformer MUST sound more solid than one with a dinky little SMPS". Or "digital audio just sounds like you chopped the music up and taped all the pieces back together". However, in the world of CONSUMER electronics (and any consumer product), the sales guys ARE going to use this to their advantage. Without going into complicated details, what this means is that, if they can convince you that a product OUGHT TO sound better, based on its technology, then you are more likely to find that it DOES sound better. This is sometimes known as "setting your expectations". (And, just as with wine, this is more likely to influence you if there are no obvious real differences to "confuse you with facts".) This is the point where people who find double-blind tests useful will remind you that "if the difference disappears when you can't see what you're listening to - then it was never really there to begin with". (Or, more accurately, the "difference" was in your mind, or in the marketing brochure, and not in the sound of the product.) Another truism is that most purchasing decisions are made very quickly... and the justification usually comes later. This is a nice way of saying that you first decide that something looks cool and you really can't live without it - THEN you make up reasons why your decision makes sense. In the context of this discussion, what this means is that we often simply decide to buys something because we just want it.... And the whole purpose of that sales brochure is to provide us with ammunition we can use to convince ourselves that our decision was reasonable.... (Once you've decided that you really want that new amplifier, nothing would be more frustrating than not being able to think up an excuse to actually buy it.) For Pete's sake, can we drop this whole malarkey about the number of output devices? It is irrelevant. As is the size of the power supply when comparing toroidal transformers to SMPS components. Chalk and cheese. Bananas and oranges.. The ultimate criteria ought to be does a component sound good or not good. If it sounds good then you may wonder about its innards and the theory behind it (or maybe you won't wonder because all you care about is how does it sound). But it seems so often that the criteria now is to find out what the innards are because that will tell your ears if it sounds good or bad. |
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Dec 19, 2017 13:07:56 GMT -5
But it seems so often that the criteria now is to find out what the innards are because that will tell your ears if it sounds good or bad. Or to form a conclusion on whether it sounds good or bad without ever giving the ears a chance to weigh in. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Dec 19, 2017 13:50:13 GMT -5
Kieth,
I bought and drank a fair quantity of '2 Buck Chuck' when it still WAS 2$. No problem. Though I once belonged to a wine club and DID have some amazing stuff.
Ultimately I had better stuff to spend money on.
Gar,
Output devices? Really? I wouldn't worry too much. Most SS amps these days use what's called a MOSFET. Some amps might still use another manufacturing process called BIPOLAR or perhaps even IGBT. All have plusses and minuses and maybe a week point, too.
All are made in a 'wafer fab' with heavily automated process. I worked for a company that made both MOSFET and IGBT devices on the same line, using different process flows.
Carver used IGBT for some of his SunFire amps and my Parasound uses BiPolar in some parts of the Halo amps I own. Not output!
EMO, I'm told, at one time, used DARLINGTON type devices, which is basically 2 transistors 'back to back' in a single package. I don't know if they were MOSFET or what. Other Darlington variations exist. The 'Triple', for example.
It's all pretty irrelevant. Some amps produce different distortion products and fail in different ways, but properly operated within design limits, it's TOUGH to tell 'em apart.
|
|
hemster
Global Moderator
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,952
|
Post by hemster on Dec 19, 2017 20:08:33 GMT -5
Kieth, I bought and drank a fair quantity of '2 Buck Chuck' when it still WAS 2$. No problem. Though I once belonged to a wine club and DID have some amazing stuff. Ultimately I had better stuff to spend money on. Gar, Output devices? Really? I wouldn't worry too much. Most SS amps these days use what's called a MOSFET. Some amps might still use another manufacturing process called BIPOLAR or perhaps even IGBT. All have plusses and minuses and maybe a week point, too. All are made in a 'wafer fab' with heavily automated process. I worked for a company that made both MOSFET and IGBT devices on the same line, using different process flows. Carver used IGBT for some of his SunFire amps and my Parasound uses BiPolar in some parts of the Halo amps I own. Not output! EMO, I'm told, at one time, used DARLINGTON type devices, which is basically 2 transistors 'back to back' in a single package. I don't know if they were MOSFET or what. Other Darlington variations exist. The 'Triple', for example. It's all pretty irrelevant. Some amps produce different distortion products and fail in different ways, but properly operated within design limits, it's TOUGH to tell 'em apart. ^That's what I said. Maybe Emotiva need to install dozens of dummy components labeled "Hybrid Atomic Output Device" in the amps. That may satisfy some people.  |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Dec 19, 2017 20:26:12 GMT -5
Kieth, I bought and drank a fair quantity of '2 Buck Chuck' when it still WAS 2$. No problem. Though I once belonged to a wine club and DID have some amazing stuff. Ultimately I had better stuff to spend money on. Gar, Output devices? Really? I wouldn't worry too much. Most SS amps these days use what's called a MOSFET. Some amps might still use another manufacturing process called BIPOLAR or perhaps even IGBT. All have plusses and minuses and maybe a week point, too. All are made in a 'wafer fab' with heavily automated process. I worked for a company that made both MOSFET and IGBT devices on the same line, using different process flows. Carver used IGBT for some of his SunFire amps and my Parasound uses BiPolar in some parts of the Halo amps I own. Not output! EMO, I'm told, at one time, used DARLINGTON type devices, which is basically 2 transistors 'back to back' in a single package. I don't know if they were MOSFET or what. Other Darlington variations exist. The 'Triple', for example. It's all pretty irrelevant. Some amps produce different distortion products and fail in different ways, but properly operated within design limits, it's TOUGH to tell 'em apart. ^That's what I said. Maybe Emotiva need to install dozens of dummy components labeled "Hybrid Atomic Output Device" in the amps. That may satisfy some people. Perhaps a set of these, one per Monoblock!  |
|
|
|
Post by harrison20 on Apr 3, 2018 22:18:31 GMT -5
I detest the thought of moving those amps without my roadie crew which currently sits at 0.
|
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Apr 3, 2018 22:41:01 GMT -5
I detest the thought of moving those amps without my roadie crew which currently sits at 0. Seems that we both have the same crew! LOL But my XPR-1’s haven’t moved since to were placed on stone! Anti theft devices! Place a set on the second floor of your house and you have a Snickers commercial,,,,,,,not going anywhere! 😋 |
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Apr 4, 2018 1:51:56 GMT -5
The right answer is always the one that makes the most sense to you. Ultimately it is not the sum of the parts but implementation and tuning etc. How much of that is realized by yours is your matter. SMPS, linear power supply, Darlington Power packs, IGBT, Bipolar, Mosfet,Jfet. How much of that does it matter if it does and sounds right to you.
It is like my two factors of cool. 1. Justified with raw data points that mean allot to you in your decision making process. 2. I just like it because....the emotional attachment or bond you have with said candidate. You can argue away the 1st one, but the 2nd one, not so much.
Any amplifier when done well and correctly gets it done. The parts are important, but is only the beginning. Voicing, tuning, and all the rest need to happen too. After all the work is done. Your ears, your factors of cool, will determine the rest. Fun hobby huh?
|
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Apr 4, 2018 17:46:54 GMT -5
IMO, it boils down to buy quality tube gear for best sonics, buy s/s for specs, device count, HT compatibility, on and on.
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Apr 4, 2018 19:27:58 GMT -5
IMO, it boils down to buy quality tube gear for best sonics, buy s/s for specs, device count, HT compatibility, on and on. It all depends on who's listening. Some people prefer one or the other. Some like both. I think I lean towards good solid state but also I like tubes. |
|
|
|
Post by milt99 on Jun 20, 2018 20:59:18 GMT -5
Just like most things, design decisions are trade offs.
Obviously more than 1 way to implement an Amp.
I like to think I'm well familiar with the classic A/B architecture.
Big Toroidal transformer, lots of capacitance, the more transistors the better.
Obviously the input, output stages and the overall design make for the finished product.
I've followed a lot of brands long enough to have a pretty good idea how they do.
Emotiva doesn't invest in the expensive basics of a solid A\B Amp to toss off the other aspects and have a crappy end product.
Claiming to have true Class A design and specs for the first 60 watts requires at a minimum what I spec'd above.
With the exception of Coda & Pass Labs, I don't know of any SS amps that claim the Class A performance of the XPA-1 Gen2 and beyond at prices that are exponentials of the Emo.
But that's what makes us fans of Emotiva, right?
Class A doesn't have the cache that it once did because of several factors. The "speed" of transistors has greatly improved.
Larger transformers, faster more stable switching PS's, capacitors and circuitry refinements have for all purposes made Class A/B, SMPS NCore and other designs viable and great sounding without the traditional limitations.
I still have an affinity for Class A performance.
To a person people have described my 2-channel system as musical, could listen to for hours.
|
|
