MMG + UPA-1s?

[Winger]

I've been running my MMG's with a pair of UPA-1's for about 2 weeks now. Prior to that, I was powering them with an LPA-1 as a part of my theater. I can't make a direct comparison between the two because I moved the MMG's out of the theater setup in lieu of ERM 6.3's.

Although I can't make an A/B comparison, I can tell a difference for the positive with the UPA's. It seems like the bass is stronger (running without a sub) and everything is just clearer. They are currently located in a very sub-optimal position, awaiting some furniture repositioning, but none the less sound nice.

As for a comparison between the XPA-2 and the UPA-1's, I can't say. they're two different animals. If power is A-number one, go for the X, for me, the 350 watts the U's are capable of is plenty and with the pre-order pricing they fit the budget better than the XPA.

-Wing

[ntrain42]

If we were talking about an extremly inefficient speaker, I could see going with the XPA-2. BUt I dont think some people here realize that the difference between 200 watts and 300 watts at 8 oms is less than 1.5db which is a minimal audible difference. Same at 4ohms, comparing 350 watts to 480watts, again just under 1.5db audible difference in amplitude. WIth average efficient MMG's your talking about deafening volumes with either amp at full rated output. With that being said the UPA-1's(which are actually XPA 3/5 amp boards with their own dedicated PS)will have a significant advantage in stereo seperation and 0 crosstalk potential. If you really needed more power than the UPA-1's you should be considering the XPA-1 monoblocks, not the XPA-2.

Remember to gain 3db of audible amplitude you have to DOUBLE your power. So if you want 3db more output from 50 watts you need to have 100watts on hand. To gain 3db more output from 100 watts, you need a 200 watt amp. Then 200 to 400, 400 to 800 and so on and so forth...........so going from 200 to 300 watts or 350 watts to 480 watts is actually a very small difference in audible output power.

[franki1]

So your saying the mono's are better with the MMG than the X2. Better soundstage are they more transparent and musical. I am using aN Outlaw 2150 that put out 190W into 4ohms. Which would be better. I use a powered sub.

[monkumonku]

Mar 8, 2010 12:37:53 GMT -5 ntrain42 said:

If we were talking about an extremly inefficient speaker, I could see going with the XPA-2. BUt I dont think some people here realize that the difference between 200 watts and 300 watts at 8 oms is less than 1.5db which is a minimal audible difference. Same at 4ohms, comparing 350 watts to 480watts, again just under 1.5db audible difference in amplitude. WIth average efficient MMG's your talking about deafening volumes with either amp at full rated output. With that being said the UPA-1's(which are actually XPA 3/5 amp boards with their own dedicated PS)will have a significant advantage in stereo seperation and 0 crosstalk potential. If you really needed more power than the UPA-1's you should be considering the XPA-1 monoblocks, not the XPA-2.

Remember to gain 3db of audible amplitude you have to DOUBLE your power. So if you want 3db more output from 50 watts you need to have 100watts on hand. To gain 3db more output from 100 watts, you need a 200 watt amp. Then 200 to 400, 400 to 800 and so on and so forth...........so going from 200 to 300 watts or 350 watts to 480 watts is actually a very small difference in audible output power.

True, but don't you have to factor in other things like available current, the parts used, etc? I know little about electronics but am thinking about the recent thread on the Odyssey amps in which the argument was made that while the total watts output wasn't real high, they were able to drive speakers easier and more cleanly because of the design, the current available, parts, etc. So their argument was that it is not just about watts. Like I said, I don't know much about this but I thought I would give you a hard time. ;D