|
|
Post by orangeLollies on Jun 14, 2018 19:38:45 GMT -5
Hi All, Just after some technical advise: How does the new BasX A-5175 compare with the old UPA-1 in terms of overall quality, dynamic handling, cross-talk, SNR, THD? ... I know the UPA-1's have more power and cross-talk is void, but anything I should actually be concerned about?
A little more waffle:
I'm currently running an XMC-1 into two UPA-1 mono-blocks (nothing powering my surrounds after my old AVR died and replaced with an XMC-1).
As I'm planning to upgrade to 7.2.4, I'll need nine more amp channels. Rather than filling my rack full of amps (keeping the UPA-1's), I'm considering keeping things clean by going for an A-5175 (LCR+Surrounds), an A-800 (Backs+Heights) and flicking the 2x UPA-1's.
My only concern is the A-5175 may not be up to the same level of fidelity of the UPA-1's? ...maybe it is? ...that's why I'm asking :-)
I'd consider myself a very 'critical listener' and mostly enjoy music through 2x KEF R900's mated with dual subs... so, these little details do matter to me to a degree, even if it's just knowing that the engineering is simply better, measurable but not perceivable is sometimes a good-enough excuse for me.
FYI, I'm only concerned with fidelity for L+R would just like to keep the number of amps in rack to a minimum. An XPA-11 is not completely off the table if I'll gain better performance other than unnecessary (IMO) dynamic headroom.
Thanks
Shane
|
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Jun 14, 2018 21:03:48 GMT -5
Ive heard neither of those amps but have heard very good reviews about both. IMHO id keep the Monoblocks for superior two channel music and add amps for all the others. Nothing sounds as good as Monoblocks with short speaker cable runs for stereo. Period!  |
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on Jun 14, 2018 21:05:32 GMT -5
Some people hear no differences between amps, some hear all the difference in the world. Somewhere in between these two opposing ideas is the truth. FWIW surround and atmos speakers don't require much wattage, the front three are the most important, and the center is right up their with a good subwoofer for making great audio, in first place.
|
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Jun 14, 2018 21:17:24 GMT -5
Some people hear no differences between amps, some hear all the difference in the world. Somewhere in between these two opposing ideas is the truth. FWIW surround and atmos speakers don't require much wattage, the front three are the most important, and the center is right up their with a good subwoofer for making great audio, in first place. I couldn’t agree with you more,,,,,,BUT for pure stereo, Monoblocks are 👑 King. The OP did specify just how important Stereo was to him! |
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Jun 14, 2018 23:16:31 GMT -5
Well.
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jun 14, 2018 23:28:49 GMT -5
My only concern is the A-5175 may not be up to the same level of fidelity of the UPA-1's? I think you are right here. 5175 Should be fine for surround duty |
|
|
|
Post by orangeLollies on Jun 15, 2018 0:42:02 GMT -5
Ive heard neither of those amps but have heard very good reviews about both. IMHO id keep the Monoblocks for superior two channel music and add amps for all the others. Nothing sounds as good as Monoblocks with short speaker cable runs for stereo. Period! I originally went with monoblocks back in th day, because I was learning about this thing call cross-talk, however, they're located at back of room over 12AWG... so not quite utilising them for all their intents :-) FWIW surround and atmos speakers don't require much wattage, the front three are the most important, and the center is right up their with a good subwoofer for making great audio, in first place. Agreed, hence the A-5175 for LCR... two channels spare, so may as well use them for surrounds... and an A-800 for the rest. I think you are right here. 5175 Should be fine for surround duty I reckon the A-5175 is overkill for surround only duty... Im considering it for potentially powering the fronts, otherwise any of the A-5/7/800's would do the trick. |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Jun 15, 2018 1:48:00 GMT -5
“I'd consider myself a very 'critical listener' and mostly enjoy music through 2x KEF R900's mated with dual subs... so, these little details do matter to me to a degree, even if it's just knowing that the engineering is simply better, measurable but not perceivable is sometimes a good-enough excuse for me.”
Then this statement is Mute!
|
|
|
|
Post by orangeLollies on Jun 15, 2018 6:06:15 GMT -5
“I'd consider myself a very 'critical listener' and mostly enjoy music through 2x KEF R900's mated with dual subs... so, these little details do matter to me to a degree, even if it's just knowing that the engineering is simply better, measurable but not perceivable is sometimes a good-enough excuse for me.” Then this statement is Mute! What have I said to make this statement mute? ...something in my last batch of reply's? Just curious, so I can respond accurately and perhaps clear it up :-) |
|
|
|
Post by thrillcat on Jun 15, 2018 8:40:29 GMT -5
“I'd consider myself a very 'critical listener' and mostly enjoy music through 2x KEF R900's mated with dual subs... so, these little details do matter to me to a degree, even if it's just knowing that the engineering is simply better, measurable but not perceivable is sometimes a good-enough excuse for me.” Then this statement is Mute! Moot.  |
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Jun 15, 2018 8:50:44 GMT -5
I personally think there hasn't been much or any significant change in amp design between these two amps. Just tose a coin and be happy.
|
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Jun 15, 2018 9:13:15 GMT -5
“I'd consider myself a very 'critical listener' and mostly enjoy music through 2x KEF R900's mated with dual subs... so, these little details do matter to me to a degree, even if it's just knowing that the engineering is simply better, measurable but not perceivable is sometimes a good-enough excuse for me.” Then this statement is Mute! Moot. 👍 LOL  |
|
|
|
Post by thrillcat on Jun 15, 2018 9:14:58 GMT -5
Moot. 👍 LOL I've always wanted to get a look at the original lyric sheet for Jessie's Girl and see if Rick Springfield knew the difference. |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Jun 15, 2018 9:16:52 GMT -5
“I'd consider myself a very 'critical listener' and mostly enjoy music through 2x KEF R900's mated with dual subs... so, these little details do matter to me to a degree, even if it's just knowing that the engineering is simply better, measurable but not perceivable is sometimes a good-enough excuse for me.” Then this statement is Mute! What have I said to make this statement mute? ...something in my last batch of reply's? Just curious, so I can respond accurately and perhaps clear it up :-) You may be right but you’ve opted for the multichannel amp bs Monoblocks for critical listening. Im just a firm believer in monos for critical stereo listening. 30 day return period, hive it a listen and then you decide. 👍 |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jun 15, 2018 9:51:17 GMT -5
Ive heard neither of those amps but have heard very good reviews about both. IMHO id keep the Monoblocks for superior two channel music and add amps for all the others. Nothing sounds as good as Monoblocks with short speaker cable runs for stereo. Period! I originally went with monoblocks back in th day, because I was learning about this thing call cross-talk, however, they're located at back of room over 12AWG... so not quite utilising them for all their intents :-) FWIW surround and atmos speakers don't require much wattage, the front three are the most important, and the center is right up their with a good subwoofer for making great audio, in first place. Agreed, hence the A-5175 for LCR... two channels spare, so may as well use them for surrounds... and an A-800 for the rest. I think you are right here. 5175 Should be fine for surround duty I reckon the A-5175 is overkill for surround only duty... Im considering it for potentially powering the fronts, otherwise any of the A-5/7/800's would do the trick. Well I don't know much about measurements. But I can tell you about build. The UPA-1 uses one XPA series gen 1 blade from an XPA-5 per channel. They have a heavy duty heat sink and no fan. Each channel has a (approx) 350 va torroidal transformer and about 30,000 mf of capacitance per channel. The UPA-1 puts out 185 watts into 4 ohms The UPA-1 had an AP precision test result published. The 5175 appears to have two blades for 5 channels - and these blades are not from an XPA-5. It also does not need a fan and uses heat sinks instead. The 5175 has 60,000 mf of capacitance for 5 channels. The 5175 puts out 250 watts in to 4 ohms. Ever since the gen 3 was introduced Emotiva has not published any test results including for this amp. I haven't heard the 5175 but I have heard the UPA-500 and basx-a200 and the UPA-1 and UPA-2. For me two channel is important so I would give the nod to the UPA-1. If you have never heard any difference with electronics I really doubt you'll hear a difference with this change. |
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on Jun 15, 2018 19:38:00 GMT -5
Some people hear no differences between amps, some hear all the difference in the world. Somewhere in between these two opposing ideas is the truth. FWIW surround and atmos speakers don't require much wattage, the front three are the most important, and the center is right up their with a good subwoofer for making great audio, in first place. I couldn’t agree with you more,,,,,,BUT for pure stereo, Monoblocks are 👑 King. The OP did specify just how important Stereo was to him! I've owned mono amps, UPA-1s - twice. I'll settle for a decent integrated amp, my Yamaha A-S1000 sounds as sweet as anything I've ever owned, and it puts out (a puny) 95w into 8 ohms. And there is NO cross talk. If you're worried about cross talk you should get a pair of mono preamps, otherwise you're back at square one, worried about cross talk!
Cross talk is a mute point with a well designed amp. Ask Lonnie! He's mentioned this a few times. But if your mono amps sound good to you, thats all that counts. My Yamaha is music to my ears.
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jun 15, 2018 20:54:53 GMT -5
I couldn’t agree with you more,,,,,,BUT for pure stereo, Monoblocks are 👑 King. The OP did specify just how important Stereo was to him! I've owned mono amps, UPA-1s - twice. I'll settle for a decent integrated amp, my Yamaha A-S1000 sounds as sweet as anything I've ever owned, and it puts out (a puny) 95w into 8 ohms. And there is NO cross talk. If you're worried about cross talk you should get a pair of mono preamps, otherwise you're back at square one, worried about cross talk!
Cross talk is a mute point with a well designed amp. Ask Lonnie! He's mentioned this a few times. But if your mono amps sound good to you, thats all that counts. My Yamaha is music to my ears.
mono preamps you say? Like this? Audiogd HE-1  Dual mono power supplies and preamp circuitry. All fed by a regenerating power supply that runs in class A. You could use a SChiit Ygdrassil to feed it which uses dual mono power supplies as well.   I'm trying to figure out if there is a way to get....DUAL MONO transports. Hehe but I don't think those exist/would perform worse than stereo transports because of clock syncing. |
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on Jun 15, 2018 22:21:37 GMT -5
I think there is a limit to mono & dual mono etc. I've heard/read about guys with dual mono preamps in use years ago by guys that came into the stereo world with 'real' old school hi-fi, monaural gear that simply bought another mono preamp and stuck them side by side and had instant stereo. Some had mono amps - some had the newest fad in audio, 2 channel amps. Much of that gear was tube driven. Transistors were costly and didn't produce the power that tubes could at the time. Stereo started catching on in the early 60s. Lots of popular music was monaural, IIRC the Beatles albums were produced in mono until the late 60's. Some of you might know more about that, I'm not fan of early Beatles stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by orangeLollies on Jun 15, 2018 23:01:44 GMT -5
You may be right but you’ve opted for the multichannel amp bs Monoblocks for critical listening. Im just a firm believer in monos for critical stereo listening. 30 day return period, hive it a listen and then you decide. 👍 Cool, totally relate to your point of view, which is why I'm not diving straight into a multi-chan amp without a little discussion... But I also don't like to let non-real difference fog my decision making too much, otherwise I may eventually loose all rationale and end up purchasing $10K power cables!! - LOL :-D Good point re demoing it - although I'm in NZ!!... so would depend if our distributor offers the same deal. Certainly worth asking. Thanks |
|
|
|
Post by orangeLollies on Jun 15, 2018 23:04:29 GMT -5
l I don't know much about measurements. But I can tell you about build. The UPA-1 uses one XPA series gen 1 blade from an XPA-5 per channel. They have a heavy duty heat sink and no fan. Each channel has a (approx) 350 va torroidal transformer and about 30,000 mf of capacitance per channel. The UPA-1 puts out 185 watts into 4 ohms The UPA-1 had an AP precision test result published. The 5175 appears to have two blades for 5 channels - and these blades are not from an XPA-5. It also does not need a fan and uses heat sinks instead. The 5175 has 60,000 mf of capacitance for 5 channels. The 5175 puts out 250 watts in to 4 ohms. Ever since the gen 3 was introduced Emotiva has not published any test results including for this amp. I haven't heard the 5175 but I have heard the UPA-500 and basx-a200 and the UPA-1 and UPA-2. For me two channel is important so I would give the nod to the UPA-1. If you have never heard any difference with electronics I really doubt you'll hear a difference with this change. Great feedback! Thanks garbulky |
|
