|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jul 30, 2022 9:51:05 GMT -5
Low sensitivity speakers like very high-powered amplifiers (generally speaking). But with any speaker of 90dB/1w/1m rating, you can usually do fine with lower powered amps. My little Heathkits (that garbulky likes so much) can do maybe 12 Watts on a good day (but probably closer, as he says, to 7 Watts). No, I don't have the gear to measure the clipping point on the amps, but it isn't much. All the other amps I have in stock at the moment also sound really good with my Klipsch RP-600m speakers, but I'm having a heck of a time trying to choose between them: Emotiva PA-1 mono blocks (class D) Crown PSA-2 class A/B AB "pro" stereo amps - class A/B Heathkit tube mono blocks (class A/B) Black Ice F22 tube integrated (class A/B) |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jul 30, 2022 13:26:50 GMT -5
my goal is to match all speakers from same brand. I do understand the difference between 65w and 100w, but my goal is give each channel plenty of head room and yes, 100w is not a ton more than 65w. I do mostly HT, but do about 10-20% music with some of if higher res like BD music, DSD, etc. My room is 18’Lx14.5”Wx8’H and enclosed with exception of doorway left of MLP. Because of the doorway my side surrounds are mounted high outside of desired wisdom. Same with backs as there is a bay window behind MLP. Because of that my surrounds have a limited height to fit without looking overly obnoxious. Really liked the Monitor Audio Gold 300, but way over my price range. Monitor Audio Silver 500 7G still is in the running. I have heard AMT and love the sound of those style tweeters. Was real interested in Ascend Acoustics, but lack of an ATMOS elevation (bound type) and their small (5.25’”) woofer is making them a hard sell. Martin Logan 60XTi with either 4i or Supersat 3 for surrounds, but not digging that combo. That leave Arendale 1723 Towers with 1961 heights as elevations and surrounds with the Monitor Audio Silver 500 as the 2 top contenders. I hear the Arendales are great, but like a lot of power on tap even when I chatted with them. The appeal of the XPA amps is the potential for 300w on tap for the main channels. And while I don’t believe half of the reviews I watch at least 1 reviews pointed out the two channels seems to be lacking compared to the mono channels. Also does not hurt that I hear the XPA will run cooler compared to say a full AB like the Monolith amps., not to mention the lighter weight. Tired of the reviews equating weight with quality for Amps, sure let me make a crappy amp and put a brick inside so it must be good as it is heavy. This is going to sound strange but power is definitely not a problem. Average listening level takes about a watt or two at most. Mine is usually less than a watt. You need the rest for dynamic swings. But 60 watts for a surround? Unlikely to be a problem. This is because music is dynamic and therefore power needs are only temporary. I listened at bzillas house to several amps including Macintosh gear. We cranked it hard and I don’t think we managed to move the meter past two to three watts if that much not even in the peaks. He has a mono tube amp that has maybe seven watts of power per channel. And it had no problem filling the room to realistic sound levels. Though it was only there that the very loudest notes had that tube clipping set in. We’ve tried several basx a-100 which is Emotiva’s lowest power amp and we couldn’t get it to distort or strain. Many years ago I attended an 'in home' demo. Amps were Constellation or some such. HUGE and powerful. But one of 'em didn't work! One of the listeners went home and brought back a pair of small EMO monoblocks. Demo went on with the amps driving a pair of 7000$ speakers, and very well at that. I heard no complaints. |
|
cawgijoe
Emo VIPs 
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it." - Yogi Berra
Posts: 5,033
|
Post by cawgijoe on Jul 31, 2022 7:01:55 GMT -5
I would agree this is the main factor, but I know someone who has owned both Gen 1 and Gen 3, including myself, who think Gen 3 sounds better. Y'all must be an awful lonely couple... Not everyone follows the crowd |
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on Jul 31, 2022 8:02:08 GMT -5
The issue of amplifiers (sounding better or worse) has always eluded me in the context of driving my loudspeaker of choice.
What has been different is the max. db. output of those systems (within reasonable limits) when driving them with the varied amplifier power outputs per channel.
All things being equal, it’s been the preamps/av processors that control those amps. that have made those sonic differences most apparent. The other key element being the subwoofer integration and HOW it’s done, creating more or less demand on the main amps.
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jul 31, 2022 14:43:05 GMT -5
Some speakers and amps simply do NOT get along. Highly reactive loads, for example, can be a problem....
Old School Big Box speakers of very high sensitivity, maybe need only a damping factor of 5 or less. Tubes rule.
But while availabbe? I can't afford enough tube power for my Panels.....of 84 or 85db sensitivity....
Some people start with speakers, but another group is 'Source First'.......take your pick.....
|
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Aug 1, 2022 9:31:31 GMT -5
Actually there are several reasons whey we switched to the SMPS - and improved "ship-ability" is certainly one of them. 1. A lighter amplifier costs less to ship, is easier to handle, is easier to pack securely, and is less likely to be damaged in shipping. (No matter how well the unit is shipped the concentrated weight of a big transformer tends to bend the chassis if it is actually dropped.) 2. The SMPS we use in all of our XPA and XPA-DR models is rated for between 2.5 kW and 3.0 kW. Therefore it is significantly more powerful than the transformer-based power supplies in most of our older models. (And, since we use the same power supply for all models, this is proportionally a LOT more power on amps with fewer channels.) 3. The SMPS is fully regulated. This means that the rail voltages it delivers do not vary significantly under load or with slight changes in supply voltage. It also means that the amount of electrical noise on the supply rails is much lower. And it also means that there is no mechanical "transformer hum" or radiated electromagnetic 60 Hz line noise. (The SMPS operates far above the range of human hearing - so not only is it quieter but any noise it does produce is inaudible.) 4. The SMPS is also more efficient - so it generates less heat. And it has also proven to be more reliable. 5. Also note that the Class H power supply topology is something that the new XPA and XPA-DR Gen3 amps inherited from our XPR amps. (This basically means that the Class A/B output stage operates from dual power supply rails.) The main significance of that is slightly higher efficiency in the middle of their output power range - so slightly cooler operation in normal use. Now... to be perfectly fair... A lot of these benefits do make things easier for us... And you may not actually be able to hear some of the technical improvements... But we are quite convinced that we all benefit from the difference... (And, yes, we do think they sound pretty darned good... and most folks seem to agree.  ) One Major drive? weight and shipping difficulties. cutting weight cuts costs and makes shipping much less expensive. Insurance claims relating to poorly packed amps must be a real nightmare..... I have argued this point since the Gen. 3 stuff came out. Reduction of shipping costs is the primary reason Emotiva went to SMPSs with the Gen.3 stuff, not because it sounds or performs better. |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Aug 1, 2022 10:01:16 GMT -5
...(And, yes, we do think they sound pretty darned good... and most folks seem to agree. ) But not all. I still prefer the sound of the BasX amps. Cordially - Boom |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Aug 1, 2022 11:01:21 GMT -5
It's a cute little amplifier... Although I would note that, if you read the actual specs from their web page... ( apos.audio/products/topping-la90-power-amp ) - 20 Hz to 40 kHz +/- 0.2 dB - 90 watts x 2, into 4 Ohms, at 1% THD - 110 watts x 2, into 4 Ohms, at 10% THD - 50 watts x 2, into 8 Ohms, at 1% THD - 65 watts x 2, into 8 Ohms, at 10% THD - for $899 So there does seem to be a bit more to the story...  I can answer your final question... All else being identical... With a big linear power supply the amp would be a little bit noisier (especially in terms of 60 Hz hum)... And you might actually notice a bit more mechanical hum from that big toroid... And the distortion might be a tiny bit higher (although, to be fair, it might not make much difference there)...  (XPA-2 gen 3) www.stereophile.com/content/emotiva-xpa-gen3-two-channel-power-amplifier-measurementsThis is one reason See those highest two peaks - those two are the actual signal. Everything else is distortion. You can compare how other amplifiers handle the tests. Though this is not the same test and not at high power - so very different - but here is a multitone test all those peaks are the signal. But you see how low the distortion is on this.  I wonder how these measured results would change if the amp were using a largish Linear PS? Big toroid, at a high enough voltage with plenty of Capacitance..... |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Aug 2, 2022 1:48:02 GMT -5
How do you deal with the switching noise of the SMPS? And the RF.....which is another can of worms.....
Also? is there anything visible on a scope when the PS shifts rails?
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Aug 12, 2022 10:10:49 GMT -5
I do want to jump in with a bit more detail and history here... First off... The sample we sent to Stereophile was a very early "pre-production sample"... And, after that, we did find a few component values that were less than optimal, and updated them... And, when we tested production samples later, we were unable to find this issue to the degree reported by Stereophile... Second... You might want to read the entire review that graph came from... Their "listening reviewers" were quite complementary about how the XPA Gen3 sounded... The least favorable comment was that it sounded "hard and 100% masculine"... And, considering how much some of their reviewers like tube amps, which they tend to describe as sounding a bit soft and smooth, that is hardly an insult. www.stereophile.com/content/emotiva-xpa-gen3-two-channel-power-amplifierThird... Note that our XPA Gen3 amp was actually on Stereophile's Recommended Products list after that in 2020 www.stereophile.com/content/recommended-components-fall-2020-edition-power-ampsFourth... Just for the record.... The fully regulated SMPS in the XPA Gen3 amps has proven not only to work really well... But to be even more reliable than the linear power supply in the Gen1 and Gen2 models. So, while a few folks like the older XPA amps better, for one reason or another, I would hardly say that the Gen3's are "getting a bad rap". In fact I'd say they're doing pretty well...  (XPA-2 gen 3) www.stereophile.com/content/emotiva-xpa-gen3-two-channel-power-amplifier-measurementsThis is one reason See those highest two peaks - those two are the actual signal. Everything else is distortion. You can compare how other amplifiers handle the tests. Though this is not the same test and not at high power - so very different - but here is a multitone test all those peaks are the signal. But you see how low the distortion is on this. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Aug 12, 2022 10:19:21 GMT -5
That's an interesting question... with an interesting answer... With a linear power supply, which runs at 60 Hz, most of the noise is at 60 Hz... And, being at such a low frequency, it is both difficult to filter, and quite audible... With our SMPS the switching noise is at ultrasonic frequencies, which makes it easier to filter, and also makes the tiny bit of remaining noise inaudible. RF noise isn't problem as long as it's handled properly (and the metal case of the amp provides excellent RF shielding). Also note that the PS does not "shift rails". Both sets of power supply rails are active and available all of the time. At low power the output stage for each channel draws all of its power from the lower rails... Then, at higher power levels, the output stage also starts drawing power from the upper rails... (The lower powered stereo modules always run from the lower set of rails.) How do you deal with the switching noise of the SMPS? And the RF.....which is another can of worms..... Also? is there anything visible on a scope when the PS shifts rails? |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 12, 2022 10:25:32 GMT -5
I do want to jump in with a bit more detail and history here... First off... The sample we sent to Stereophile was a very early "pre-production sample"... And, after that, we did find a few component values that were less than optimal, and updated them... And, when we tested production samples later, we were unable to find this issue to the degree reported by Stereophile... [/quote] That's fair but Dan said he would report back with the tested results run with the same test. He still has not. The only thing he did mention that (I may be paraphrasing) was the test was unrealistic due to the power and time it runs- even though plenty of other amps do way better at it. You see how that looks? Also this is not a tube amp. I can totally understand tube amps with massive distortion way higher than this. People want that sound. But distortion is not sought after in solid state amps |
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Aug 12, 2022 12:33:30 GMT -5
That's fair but Dan said he would report back with the tested results run with the same test. He still has not. The only thing he did mention that (I may be paraphrasing) was the test was unrealistic due to the power and time it runs- even though plenty of other amps do way better at it. You see how that looks? Also this is not a tube amp. I can totally understand tube amps with massive distortion way higher than this. People want that sound. But distortion is not sought after in solid state amps I believe he did... See the PDFs of the test results attached to his post in the "Stereophile Review" thread HERE |
|
|
|
Post by jbrunwa on Aug 12, 2022 13:28:34 GMT -5
That's fair but Dan said he would report back with the tested results run with the same test. He still has not. The only thing he did mention that (I may be paraphrasing) was the test was unrealistic due to the power and time it runs- even though plenty of other amps do way better at it. You see how that looks? Also this is not a tube amp. I can totally understand tube amps with massive distortion way higher than this. People want that sound. But distortion is not sought after in solid state amps I believe he did... See the PDFs of the test results attached to his post in the "Stereophile Review" thread HEREI think that it would be fair to measure any amp at 20% of peak power spec OR the spec’ed continuous power rating, where continuous power rating is spec’ed |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Aug 12, 2022 15:52:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on Aug 12, 2022 16:21:17 GMT -5
I am not looking to start a dust up, but really trying to understand. I began shopping for separate as my next logical step from AVR. I was reading up on affordable amps and the XPA line came up. I have narrowed down my choices to a Monoprice Monolith amp, XPA-7 vs Monolith 7X. I like to do my homework and did a lot of reading and watching/reading of reviews. Both products get good reviews and the Monoprice is designed and built by ATI to Monoprice space. When I dig deeper many users on the various Audiophile/Home Theater forums and it seems there are a great deal of people that have had long term reliability issues and then customer service concerns. I have been really intrigued and just struggle to bring myself to make what will be a large purchase for me on my several year journey to upgrade my home theater. Wondering what kind fof issues or longevity people are seeing with the Ge 3 XPA amps? And if you had issues is it the amp modules or the SMPS PSU? I feel like publicly they have taken a good approach for out of warranty. As seen on their website FAQ: If you have a piece of Emotiva gear that is out of warranty and has stopped working, you may discover that we are no longer able to provide out-of-warranty repair for it, or that the cost to do so would exceed either your budget or the current value of the product itself. If this happens, you may wish to consider one of our trade-in programs.
Original owners of Emotiva gear are eligible for our regular Trade-In Program, while we have a Core Value Trade-In program for owners who purchased their Emotiva gear second hand. Note that, even if your unit is not currently working, or has cosmetic damage, it may still entitle you to a significant trade-in credit against the purchase of new Emotiva gear.Of course one usually does buy an amp expecting to get a life span of a decade or more. It seems maybe the latest Gen 3 XPA products may not be designed/built with that kind of longevity in mind. Again, not looking for a fight I know I can find upset people with Monoproce as well. Buy the amp. and enjoy it. After a period of time, you will discover the biggest problems are the places you go to read about it. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 12, 2022 21:25:31 GMT -5
That's fair but Dan said he would report back with the tested results run with the same test. He still has not. The only thing he did mention that (I may be paraphrasing) was the test was unrealistic due to the power and time it runs- even though plenty of other amps do way better at it. You see how that looks? Also this is not a tube amp. I can totally understand tube amps with massive distortion way higher than this. People want that sound. But distortion is not sought after in solid state amps I believe he did... See the PDFs of the test results attached to his post in the "Stereophile Review" thread HEREWell he didn't though. He clearly said he measured it at 60% the power of the stereophile test. So it wasn't the same test that the other amplifiers go through. I'm also not certain that it was measured for as long as he didn't mention that either. |
|
|
|
Post by bonscott on Aug 13, 2022 11:22:12 GMT -5
Class D Multi channel Amps are gaining more market share for Home Theatre. Emotiva made the right move with the Gen 3 lighter more efficient Amps. IMO Emotiva is not marketing there products to the same group shopping for McIntosh or Bryston amps. For the overwhelming majority of people who buy Emotiva Amps Inaudible wavelengths and graphs mean nothing. They are concerned about price and reliability.
|
|
|
|
Post by geebo on Aug 13, 2022 13:18:57 GMT -5
I believe he did... See the PDFs of the test results attached to his post in the "Stereophile Review" thread HEREWell he didn't though. He clearly said he measured it at 60% the power of the stereophile test. So it wasn't the same test that the other amplifiers go through. I'm also not certain that it was measured for as long as he didn't mention that either. They just tested a 500wpc $7,500 Rotel amp and ran that test at 50wpc or 10% of it's rated output. The same guy tested a Parasound with an output into 4 ohms of 850 watts at a 100 watt level into 4 ohms or under 12% of the rated power. A Parasound amp with an output rating of 300wpc was tested at 50 watts or under 17% The Emotiva rated at 300wpc was tested at 100 watts or 33% of the rated output. Why the inconsistencies? Are they looking for a result then find the means to get there? Dan tested the XPA at 20% which is more than those I listed above. How would those other amps test at a 33% level? We simply don't know, do we. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 13, 2022 13:42:54 GMT -5
Well he didn't though. He clearly said he measured it at 60% the power of the stereophile test. So it wasn't the same test that the other amplifiers go through. I'm also not certain that it was measured for as long as he didn't mention that either. They just tested a 500wpc $7,500 Rotel amp and ran that test at 50wpc or 10% of it's rated output. The same guy tested a Parasound with an output into 4 ohms of 850 watts at a 100 watt level into 4 ohms or under 12% of the rated power. A Parasound amp with an output rating of 300wpc was tested at 50 watts or under 17% The Emotiva rated at 300wpc was tested at 100 watts or 33% of the rated output. Why the inconsistencies? Are they looking for a result then find the means to get there? Dan tested the XPA at 20% which is more than those I listed above. How would those other amps test at a 33% level? We simply don't know, do we. Were those amps using switching ps or class D? I have no idea their reasons why. I’m guessing those amps failed or badly distorted under heavier loads due the design limitations of the above similar to the xpa gen 3. Neither are good reasons though. |
|
)
