Quick XPA-2 Impression and Question

[houston1]

I love this amp! I have a pair of Klipsch RF-5 towers. Previously, I was using a Rotel RMB-1075 (125 watts/channel x5 channels) amplifier. The Rotel was a definite upgrade from my Denon 3806 receiver. What the Rotel gave me was much better power handling to my 5 speakers evident by more clarity in the midrange. But, I was always lacking decent bass out of my speakers. I have always thought that the bass deficiency was due to my speakers. But now I have the XPA-2, the bass out of these speakers sounds great. For music, I now prefer the speakers without a subwoofer. So here is my question. Why do my speakers sound better with the new amp? I mean these are very efficient speakers (sensitivity at 99dB at 8 ohm impedance). I thought that the Rotel would have an easy job driving these speakers, but my XPA-2 makes them sound much more fuller and even. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

John

[strindl]

I had the same experience when I hooked up my XPA-2. The speakers had been driven by an Adcom GFA-555 mk II rated at 200/325 watts per channel at 8/4 ohms. The bass was far deeper and more solid with the XPA-2. The speakers didn't change..it was all the amp.

I also noticed improved clarity and detail..especially in the sounds of an acoustic guitar string being plucked or strummed. Those speakers simply didn't reveal that type of detail being driven by the Adcom.

[House]

i have a rotel 1095 and it literally drives the piss out of 5 towers.....my center is a cc-690 by paradigm so basically its a full tower.....Rotel does not seem to design for low end punch but more for BALANCE....

I will say I am done buying Rotel......for the cost and performance I am all for EMO after my experience with the XPA-2

[steve1616]

The reason you hear more bass from the emotiva is because it has a higher gain structure, and is louder at the same preamp settings. If you used an SPL meter, and truly do a double blind test, you wont see a difference. I have a Rotel 1075, and it has just as much bass as anything. Rotel and emotiva design flat frequency response amps and they will not sound. They just amplify the output signal just the same as a Mac, Bryston, whatever else. Many people claim to do blind tests, but are lying. I would love to be the guy level matching and switching, so that I could laugh at people that think they hear differences that aren't there. The only amps that sound like they have more bass has to do with an elevated frequency response in the lower range. I would rather have a flat frequency amp and adjust the bass to my preference. I just turn my sub up.

[stiehl11]

I can say that the XPA-2 has a more "full" sound than the XPA-5 that has the same gain. So, I'll simply call B.S. and let you try again.

There is a reason for the perceived difference, but I'll wait until you do your test and follow up with an investigation of the design and components used before I post again.

[steve1616]

Stiehl11, it doesn't matter the design of the internals. It only matters what the frequency response is, if the speaker needs more power at given volume so it is not clipping, and other functions that can be shown on charts like distortion, and etc. You can call B.S. all you want, but it is your exact personality that couldn't tell the difference between $10,000 monoblocks from a $500 pioneer receiver in actual double blind tests. I have no idea about the XPA-5 for sure, but I have seen the results on the rotel 1075 and 1095 which is what was in question, and I have seen the test results of the XPA-2. They are all completely linear in the frequency response, and can pass a cube test so it will sound the exact same. Stereophyle couldn't tell the difference between a generic Carver amp from a high dollar tube amp even though Carver had to match the distortion of the tube amp with transfer function. I am sure that you probably believe that 10,000 speaker cable is better than regular proper guage speaker wire, also. I don't care if the inside of an amp is made of dog crap. If it can strictly amplify the incoming signal, then it can sound the exact same as the 50,000 Macintosh solid states.

[Porscheguy]

I agree. The XPA-2 is amazing............ That is until I got (2) XPA-1's..............

Sonic Nirvana :-) :-)

[earwaxxer]

Its more like graduating from "mid-fi" to "hi-fi". - I was a happy camper in the "Rotel, NAD Proton" level of audiophiledome in the 80's. Didnt think it could get better than that. Now, components in the XPA-2 league (Krell, MSB, Burson, Bryston, Wyred, Tact, Jeff Roland, Cary, Pass Labs etc. etc), in the "hi-fi" levels, are able to flesh out the sound in many ways. Its not about power, more about finesse, detail, clarity, timber, sound stage, tonal accuracy, lack of semblance and noise etc. Qualities that are hard to measure. Easy to hear.

Bottom line - the ticket to ride high used to be quite steep. Thanks to Emotiva we can all have a taste!

[hemster]

Jan 28, 2012 19:57:52 GMT -5 earwaxxer said:

Its more like graduating from "mid-fi" to "hi-fi". - I was a happy camper in the "Rotel, NAD Proton" level of audiophiledome in the 80's. Didnt think it could get better than that. Now, components in the XPA-2 league (Krell, MSB, Burson, Bryston, Wyred, Tact, Jeff Roland, Cary, Pass Labs etc. etc), in the "hi-fi" levels, are able to flesh out the sound in many ways. Its not about power, more about finesse, detail, clarity, timber, sound stage, tonal accuracy, lack of semblance and noise etc. Qualities that are hard to measure. Easy to hear.

Bottom line - the ticket to ride high used to be quite steep. Thanks to Emotiva we can all have a taste!

Well said!

Thanks to Emotiva, we can all have a feast!

[sidvicious]

A Feast that you never get full from!!!