or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Official JTR speaker thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official JTR speaker thread - Page 183

post #5461 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8DOGG View Post

In my case, I use a Integra 80.3 processor and need an external amp. I've got no doubt that a receiver could power my JTR's easily...... that being said, it will never happen. I like buying stuff like amps, processors, etc. It's my hobby. i've moved my HT to separates long ago and will not ever be going back, it's too much fun to buy new stuff to try out! I mean heck, most of us on here would be fine with S8's as the mains, let alone needing T12's and the Noesis with our subs. I tjhink saying we are going overboard with different amps may be calling the kettle black biggrin.gif

That being said, I run 1000 watts to all my JTR speakers when they probably use 20 cool.gif

you overbought on the amp. tongue.gif


All you needed was a little t-amp to hit reference. wink.gif

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?partnumber=310-300&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=pla&utm_term={keyword}
post #5462 of 18704
I notice that whenever arguments of this nature gets going, there'll be a split between the so called 'scientific group' and the 'non-scientific one'...

In fact, I must say I am a science guy as well..

I think most of the time, the maths don't add up due to incomplete variables. If all the variables are known, and if the math add up, then nothing anyone can say 'subjectively' will change the 'truth'...

In this case, I think a lot of variables are unknown, such as what robobob said about 'transients', 'clipping', minute stuff...

So, in the end, if anyone can notice a 'real difference', then the math just didn't add up to begin with...
post #5463 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by robobob View Post

One word: transients!
How many have used a simple oscilloscope (with high bandwidth) to observe an audio signal?
Most audiophile thinking is stuck on the concept of average or RMS power requirements. Real life and real music (using the dynamic range of a live, uncompressed performance as the standard for discussion) is very spiky and unpredictable in levels.
Proper handling of transients requires sufficient headroom! ANY hard clipping or even soft clipping from an inadequate slew rate destroys the dynamics and timbre in short order and takes the ease out of the listening experience. Our ear/brain systems can be easily fatigued by simply placing a low pass filter in the signal path, forcing the brain to try to compensate by "calculating" the missing upper harmonics.
Here is another factor: how dynamic or compressed is the source?
The goal of audio engineering is to reproduce, as closely as possible, the source as captured. That is a clear goal when recording natural acoustic sounds, classical music, jazz, folk etc., which our ear/brains have specifically evolved to process and for which we have massive experience for comparison.
However, when the source is synthetic, as in electonica and the musical genres dependent on electronic processing, the standard can become arbitrary. When the majority of audio sources are A) artificial electronic creations and B) consist of compressed dynamics/transients, the standard for reproduction reduces to: which system flatters the source, in the ear of the beholder!
Also, as pop music has been mastered louder and louder, in order to catch the ear's attention when played through low fidelity sources, there is a more restricted dynamic range inherent in the source. Playing a source such as this through a system with inadequate headroom, MAY not be as noticeable because the system has less dynamic range to reproduce from the source.
As the listening level increases toward reference, going up the power doubling curve from a higher initial (average) level, requires more doubling, with transient levels possibly requiring 10 times the power over the average.
Discarding the need to justify compromising due to budget, what remains is a practical general principle that supplying sufficient power to the speaker to avoid ANY clipping distortion under all conceivable operating conditions, should be the foundation for powering audio systems. Even if that clipping is hard to identify and of short enough duration that the drivers are not immediately degraded, the negative effect on the sonic illusion is real and discernible.
High efficiency speakers at a given SPL start lower on the power doubling curve but clean speakers also encourage louder levels since they sound effortless!
While most home theaters may not require all of the wattage which Jeff specifies in his literature to reach reference levels, with the bounty of dedicated power amplifiers on the market, why cripple your quality experience with designed-to-minimal-cost receiver amplifiers?
Those claiming that they can't hear the differences: our perceptions of audio and video can be trained.... or not.
Some people never perceived the rainbow effect inherent in single-chip DLP projectors until the unfortunate day when someone showed them how to see it! As a result, many became candidates for different projector technologies.
Similarly, as the quality of your listening room improves with masking, time smearing, room resonances removed, your ear begins to unravel the sonic illusion, perceiving layers previously unheard.

I was going to say that and with the exception of my misspelling discernible, I almost had it ...tongue.gif

Good post Rob or is it Bob? smile.gif
post #5464 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

I was going to say that and with the exception of my misspelling discernible, I almost had it ...tongue.gif
Good post Rob or is it Bob? smile.gif

Nah, it's Robo-Bob
post #5465 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post

I notice that whenever arguments of this nature gets going, there'll be a split between the so called 'scientific group' and the 'non-scientific one'...
In fact, I must say I am a science guy as well..
I think most of the time, the maths don't add up due to incomplete variables. If all the variables are known, and if the math add up, then nothing anyone can say 'subjectively' will change the 'truth'...
In this case, I think a lot of variables are unknown, such as what robobob said about 'transients', 'clipping', minute stuff...
So, in the end, if anyone can notice a 'real difference', then the math just didn't add up to begin with...
That is what I am always trying to say when I am referring to Math as a way to equal how it will sound. I completely understand and agree when people use this as a way to find out SPL and reference.
It is the variables that are missed or just not considered when talking about how it will sound at reference. I sometimes "dumb things down" and it appears that I draw a line in the sand.
Since I already have my JTR speakers I assume we all know that they are capable of unbearable SPL with little power or watts. I take that as a given and feel like I am moving backwards when we talk about it.
I am always trying to figure out how to squeeze as much performance as possible out of my system. Since alot of us have such different goals to what we expect or want from our Rigs sometimes it appears we debate over the wrong aspect.
2 different people with 2 different goals in audio can disagree on what road to take to acheive this but I hope that we all have the same destination in mind "Pure Bliss". Once I get there I am not coming back !!!
I share a common goal with alot of JTR owners and this thread is the icing on the cake for me. I have learned so much from the people on here and I still have an infinite amount to go.
Rob (RMK) is a man who alot of us follow simply becuase he "puts his money where his mouth is". I consider that method to be the most straight forward and direct. It is also less confusing to me. Sometimes I just need to be showed instead of told.
IMO this is the best thread on AVS or any other forum and I say thanks to all who have posted on here. Every bit of it whether positive or negative is a learnig experience or teachable moment.
Hopefully the Best is yet to come.

Robobob
That is an excellent post and it really helps me organize my thoughts on this.
I knew there was an acceptable explaination I just could not find the words to state it.
Thank You
Chris
Edited by countryWV - 11/16/12 at 1:36pm
post #5466 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

Do you guys who use receivers on the JTR speakers change your receiver to 4ohm from the 6ohm + setting that is default?
I have an Onkyo TX-NR1007 which has a pretty beefy (verified) amp section. I switched the setting back and forth and I'm not sure I can tell any difference at all unless it's exceptionally subtle I'm not sure what that menu setting is even doing?

I'm curious about this as well.
post #5467 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

Do you guys who use receivers on the JTR speakers change your receiver to 4ohm from the 6ohm + setting that is default?
I have an Onkyo TX-NR1007 which has a pretty beefy (verified) amp section. I switched the setting back and forth and I'm not sure I can tell any difference at all unless it's exceptionally subtle I'm not sure what that menu setting is even doing?

Did this same thing, couldn't tell a thing. We have the same AVR.
post #5468 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

Do you guys who use receivers on the JTR speakers change your receiver to 4ohm from the 6ohm + setting that is default?
I have an Onkyo TX-NR1007 which has a pretty beefy (verified) amp section. I switched the setting back and forth and I'm not sure I can tell any difference at all unless it's exceptionally subtle I'm not sure what that menu setting is even doing?
My Denon 4311 has that option and with the AVR running the system turned to 4ohm (instead of 8 or 6) It makes no audible difference to me. My SC-37 AND SC-57 did not have that option and they all 3 sounded the same when running or powering the system. IMO all 3 have the same negative characteristics when going to reference.
Chris
post #5469 of 18704
Hey countryWV,
do you notice the difference with a pre/pro or are you using the Denon as a processor? I have separates right now and love the sound but I would love to get HDMI for the ease of use. I was thinking of using an elite as a pre/pro but I don't want to lose anything I have now but gain HDMI switching and codecs. I never used an AVR as an Pre/pro only but I have used a Denon, Marantz, Emotiva(UMC-1), etc... pre/pro's and I still like the Ada better even with optical.
post #5470 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by maintman View Post

I propose a side session of some reference level avr vs. external amp blind tests at a future gtg!

That is an excellent idea...

I believe that a well executed (that caveat is huge) blind test would be fun and perhaps interesting.
post #5471 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by countryWV View Post

My Denon 4311 has that option and with the AVR running the system turned to 4ohm (instead of 8 or 6) It makes no audible difference to me. My SC-37 AND SC-57 did not have that option and they all 3 sounded the same when running or powering the system. IMO all 3 have the same negative characteristics when going to reference.
Chris

AVR ohm switch settings were discussed in another thread here somewhere and the consensus was that all it did was limit current. The settings shouldn't result in an audible change.
post #5472 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by MKtheater View Post

Hey countryWV,
do you notice the difference with a pre/pro or are you using the Denon as a processor? I have separates right now and love the sound but I would love to get HDMI for the ease of use. I was thinking of using an elite as a pre/pro but I don't want to lose anything I have now but gain HDMI switching and codecs. I never used an AVR as an Pre/pro only but I have used a Denon, Marantz, Emotiva(UMC-1), etc... pre/pro's and I still like the Ada better even with optical.

I have used my 4311, SC-57, & SC-67 as a prepro with no issues. The SC-67 does run the coolest of all three. I believe that the newer 2012 Sc series are the only Pioneer recievers rated 4 ohm. Denon 4311 is rated for 4 ohms.
post #5473 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by MKtheater View Post

Hey countryWV,
do you notice the difference with a pre/pro or are you using the Denon as a processor? I have separates right now and love the sound but I would love to get HDMI for the ease of use. I was thinking of using an elite as a pre/pro but I don't want to lose anything I have now but gain HDMI switching and codecs. I never used an AVR as an Pre/pro only but I have used a Denon, Marantz, Emotiva(UMC-1), etc... pre/pro's and I still like the Ada better even with optical.
I am running the 4311 in pre amp mode so it shuts down the internal amps which keeps it from getting hot. I like it alot but I am wanting xlr connections so when the onkyo SC-5510 preamp or Integra 80.4 prepro become available I am getting one. The pioneers worked great also but they ran hot real hot. I think the new models SC 67/68 are supposed to run cooler. I prefer both pioneers over the 4311 but the Audyssey XT32 makes it worth having to me. The Pioneer is the ultimate for movie performance and that marvell chip is excellent. I loved the THX Ultra modes for cinema and music. The Onkyo/Integra seems to be the best of both pioneer and Denon combined that is why it is next.
To answer the question about sound there is no diffderence IMO. The amp takes all the load off the AVR's allowing them to just do there job of processing sound. If possible get one that you can shut the amps off and it should run cooler. You can get incredible deals on the 4311 now so it is a great choice. If it had xlr connections I would not even be thinking about something else.
hope this helps
Chris
Edited by countryWV - 11/16/12 at 10:43am
post #5474 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by hogues View Post

I'm curious about this as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by countryWV View Post

My Denon 4311 has that option and with the AVR running the system turned to 4ohm (instead of 8 or 6) It makes no audible difference to me. My SC-37 AND SC-57 did not have that option and they all 3 sounded the same when running or powering the system. IMO all 3 have the same negative characteristics when going to reference.
Chris

All this setting does is allow the receiver to take the 4ohm load properly. In general I am not really sure why any AVR that can do 4 ohms even has the option to switch, unless there is some in-audible benefit to restricting the current to 6-8ohms
post #5475 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post

All this setting does is allow the receiver to take the 4ohm load properly. In general I am not really sure why any AVR that can do 4 ohms even has the option to switch, unless there is some in-audible benefit to restricting the current to 6-8ohms
I always considered it to be Not Important. The 4311 manual states that if even 1 speaker is 4ohm and the rest are 8ohm then still change it to 4ohm . Since my LCR are 4ohm and my SS,RS are 8ohm I did not think it mattered or they would have had an option to change each speaker individually instead of grouping them together as 4 ohm. So for that reason I thought it to be not important.
Chris
post #5476 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

Do you guys who use receivers on the JTR speakers change your receiver to 4ohm from the 6ohm + setting that is default?

I have an Onkyo TX-NR1007 which has a pretty beefy (verified) amp section. I switched the setting back and forth and I'm not sure I can tell any difference at all unless it's exceptionally subtle I'm not sure what that menu setting is even doing?

When I had a Onkyo TX-NR905, I was running as a preamp, it would still get ridiculously hot in 6+ ohm mode even with no speakers connected, but was noticeably cooler when I changed the setting to 4 ohm. This leads me to believe, that this setting could limit output, if your room is large enough that the amp becomes the limiting factor. However, with most rooms and JTR's it probably doesn't matter. ,
post #5477 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

All you needed was a little t-amp to hit reference. wink.gif
I have the original version of this t-amp. Remember the gunshots on Open Range with the Noesis? They would have sounded like a BB Gun with the t-amp. At 12 feet away from the speakers, the sound with the t-amps wouldn't have even reached 105 dB. With the 800 continuous watts available per channel, we were able to reach over 124 dB with one speaker. Huge difference!
post #5478 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

I was going to say that and with the exception of my misspelling discernible, I almost had it ...tongue.gif
Good post Rob or is it Bob? smile.gif

Well, great minds think alike, so they say! Glad I saved you the typing.

Rob is a verb, not a noun so in corporeal life outside of the InterMind, I go by Robert. biggrin.gif

Robobob is a nick name which stuck; it referred to my ability to code continuously for days without sleep, when required....
Edited by robobob - 11/16/12 at 2:53pm
post #5479 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by countryWV View Post

That is what I am always trying to say when I am referring to Math as a way equal how it will sound. I completely understand and agree when people use this as a way to find out SPL and reference.
It is the variables that are missed or just not considered when talking about how it will sound at reference. I sometimes "dumb things down" and it appears that I draw a line in the sand.
Since I already have my JTR speakers I assume we all know that they are capable of unbearable SPL with little power or watts. I take that as a given and feel like I am moving backwards when we talk about it.
I am always trying to figure out how to squeeze as much performance as possible out of my system. Since alot of us have such different goals to what we expect or want from our Rigs sometimes it appears we debate over the wrong aspect.
2 different people with 2 different goals in audio can disagree on what road to take to acheive this but I hope that we all have the same destination in mind "Pure Bliss". Once I get there I am not coming back !!!
I share a common goal with alot of JTR owners and this thread is the icing on the cake for me. I have learned so much from the people on here and I still have an infinite amount to go.
Rob (RMK) is a man who alot of us follow simply becuase he "puts his money where his mouth is". I consider that method to be the most straight forward and direct. It is also less confusing to me. Sometimes I just need to be showed instead of told.
IMO this is the best thread on AVS or any other forum and I say thanks to all who have posted on here. Every bit of it whether positive or negative is a learnig experience or teachable moment.
Hopefully the Best is yet to come.
Robobob
That is an excellent post and it really helps me organize my thoughts on this.
I knew there was an acceptable explaination I just could not find the words to state it.
Thank You
Chris

Chris, glad you found value in the post!

Always risky to post technical points, even in a "technical forum"; Sometimes, instead of treating posts which attempt to present a little technical rigor as food for thought, people get triggered emotionally when one or more of their cherished audio concepts get challenged.

Feed those beautiful JTR speakers ALL the good clean power they require! Then listen as they disappear and the music takes their place! cool.gif
post #5480 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

Do you guys who use receivers on the JTR speakers change your receiver to 4ohm from the 6ohm + setting that is default?
I have an Onkyo TX-NR1007 which has a pretty beefy (verified) amp section. I switched the setting back and forth and I'm not sure I can tell any difference at all unless it's exceptionally subtle I'm not sure what that menu setting is even doing?

I have the Onkyo 805 receiver (Onkyo 805 Bench Test). When I originally bought my Triple 8s, I emailed the specs to Jeff and he suggested that I leave my 805 receiver in 6ohm mode as it delivered more wattage. I never had a problem with it in 6ohm mode running the Triple 8s or my current 4ohm Triad speakers. I think your 1007 should be very similar in power rating.

This is taken from the Article:
First we left the 805 in its 6 ohm setting, brought the output up to 1% THD (popularly accepted as the point of clipping), and measured the output. We then loaded it with 4 ohms on each channel and measured. Switching the 805 to its 4 ohm setting we again measured with 8 and 4 ohm loads. The results are tabulated as follows.

>6 ohm setting (default)
8ohm load 173 Watts
4ohm load 270 Watts*

>4 ohm setting
8ohm load 87 Watts
4ohm load 151Watts

* Time limited test under controlled laboratory conditions.

One can see at a glance the performance of the amplifiers in their default setting is remarkably good for a $1,099 comprehensively featured receiver. The behavior is commensurate with good amplifier design in that, transiently at least, it will dump a lot of current as evidenced by the 270W into 4 ohms. Not quite "doubling down" as the saying goes, but none actually do so (cleaver spec'ing just makes it seem like some can).

Switching to the 4 ohm setting, we see exactly what we expect: reduced output as compared to the default setting, regardless of actual load. While at first glance a dramatic shift from the default, these numbers must bear interpretation. Having only 87 watts output seems not so good, but the >4ohm setting should only be used with low impedance speakers where for the lion's share of the spectrum the Onkyo will be in that 151 watt territory, which is only about 5% less than the 173 watts into 8 ohm load of the >6 ohm setting.


I never noticed an audible difference in either mode but either mode could get Very loud in my little room.

Thx,
Claude
Edited by Bunga99 - 11/16/12 at 3:15pm
post #5481 of 18704
Thanks for the input Claude!
post #5482 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8DOGG View Post

There is no "best", though I can tell you, you don't have to spend that. They don't need a ton of power. I'd recommend either D-sonic or Wyred 4 Sound. I really like both of their products.
this would be pretty sweet! http://www.d-sonic.net/products/3-channel-amplifiers/

I am now totally interested in considering the external amps route...

Can someone tell me what's the difference between getting the above recommend for 3 channel that goes into 250watts at US1600 and $2300 or thereabouts if you want 500 watts into 3 channel vs the below:

http://www.amazon.com/Behringer-EP4000-Professional-Accelerated-Technology/dp/B001U5JFNM

The Behringer 4000, which supplies 1400 watts into 4 ohms into 2 channels.. at only US $275 at amazon.. i can buy 2 of these and it can power into 4 channels with tons of power to spare... why spend the $2300 for 3 500watt channels? Am I crazy or is behringer a far inferior product?

BTW: I just noticed that the D-Sonic is NOT ICE-Power... the owner said so:
Quote:
Q: These new mono amps are a departure from your B&O-based designs?

A: The amplification core of our M2-1500M units is not ICEpower. This is relatively new technology that is possibly the best in the world at this time. The combination of sonics, power, build quality and customer values of the supplier make for a solid product. I have evaluated seven other class D technologies. I felt that all but one (who we are currently working with) had a long way to go. We designed our own input circuitry for this technology. These are the red PCBs you see in the interior shots.

Edited by coolgeek - 11/17/12 at 7:37am
post #5483 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post

I am now totally interested in considering the external amps route...
Can someone tell me what's the difference between getting the above recommend for 3 channel that goes into 250watts at US1600 and $2300 or thereabouts if you want 500 watts into 3 channel vs the below:
http://www.amazon.com/Behringer-EP4000-Professional-Accelerated-Technology/dp/B001U5JFNM
The Behringer 4000, which supplies 1400 watts into 4 ohms into 2 channels.. at only US $275 at amazon.. i can buy 2 of these and it can power into 4 channels with tons of power to spare... why spend the $2300 for 3 500watt channels? Am I crazy or is behringer a far inferior product?
BTW: I just noticed that the D-Sonic is NOT ICE-Power... the owner said so:

At that price it might be worth a try but only if the amps are not in the room with you as fan noise will be an issue. There may be other issues but I'll leave those comments to those with empirical data. smile.gif
post #5484 of 18704
post #5485 of 18704
I.C.E. is a name brand. Pioneer used to use a version in their Elite models thru the SC-37 but now make their own. D-sonic M1 version was also ICE model. Now the M2 model use another Scandinavian made brand. The new one is same class D technology and every bit the equal. What really caught my attention was the $$$$ of the Bel Canto compared to D-Sonic and W4sound. That shows what a deal they are compared to the Bel Canto. D-Sonic at $2275 is a bargain when comparing against others in class D. Just a few short years ago it would have cost over $10,000 grand for the same Multichannel M2 3500 7 X 500/1000.
I am not trying to talk about the Pro audio amp you mentioned but that is apples to oranges and you get what you pay for. Crown is my choice in the Pro audio style amps if that is where you end up. Read back over last 10 - 20 pages and you can find some minor discussions about amps and JTR's.
For me on a recommendation it would be D-Sonic or Wyred4Sound. One is pretty much equal to the other. I feel like those 2 amps represent the point of diminishing returns as you could spend more with no gain in performance. If you want to save a money the Crowns are a hell of a good value. Definately ask someone on here that owns a couple and they can tell you about it.
The D-Sonic amp is the most powerful and compact amp I have ever been aroud and it runs cool/cold. 7 channel model weighs less than 50 lbs while the 3 channel model weighs less than 30 lbs.
Chris
Edited by countryWV - 11/17/12 at 8:37am
post #5486 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by countryWV View Post

I.C.E. is a name brand. Pioneer used to use a version in their Elite models thru the SC-37 but now make their own. D-sonic M1 version was also ICE model. Now the M2 model use another Scandinavian made brand. The new one is same class D technology and every bit the equal. What really caught my attention was the $$$$ of the Bel Canto compared to D-Sonic and W4sound. That shows what a deal they are compared to the Bel Canto. D-Sonic at $2275 is a bargain when comparing against others in class D. Just a few short years ago it would have cost over $10,000 grand for the same Multichannel M2 3500 7 X 500/1000.
I am not trying to talk about the Pro audio amp you mentioned but that is apples to oranges and you get what you pay for. Crown is my choice in the Pro audio style amps if that is where you end up. Read back over last 10 - 20 pages and you can find some minor discussions about amps and JTR's.
For me on a recommendation it would be D-Sonic or Wyred4Sound. One is pretty much equal to the other. I feel like those 2 amps represent the point of diminishing returns as you could spend more with no gain in performance. If you want to save a money the Crowns are a hell of a good value. Definately ask someone on here that owns a couple and they can tell you about it.
The D-Sonic amp is the most powerful and compact amp I have ever been aroud and it runs cool/cold. 7 channel model weighs less than 50 pounds.

Chris

Most of D-sonic's multi-channel M2's still use the ICE amps. I have an M2 with 7 asp1000's in it. When looking at the specs of the amps, anything with either 250 or 500 watts is still an ICE amp. Only the last 2 on the page are the new modules and the other models are the same. I've actually had this discussion with Dennis before I bought my amp, though he wouldn't say the exact modules he was using in his amps, A simple top pop would tell all I guess lol
http://www.d-sonic.net/products/multichannel-amplifiers/
post #5487 of 18704
Ok, I have gone about reading more about amps... Apparently, the ICE-Power designs may not be the best in sound quality as they sacrifice sound quality for efficiencies as opposed to class A/B... but A/B are not as efficient and may run hot and are heavier..

Anyways, just for comparison's sake, the emotiva sounds like a great competitor and may actually sound better:

http://shop.emotiva.com/collections/reference-series/products/xpr5

It'll drive clean 600 watts into 5 channels as opposed to the same priced D-Sonic that gives only 250 watts into 3 channels.

with about the same price tag of $1600... although the emotiva is a bit more heavier...

This would be great for my 5.1 JTR setup...

I can use my Onkyo 3010/3009 (note sure which to get yet) as my pre/pro, and then use the Emotiva to drive my LCR (noesis), and surrounds (S8). SInce cash is getting out of hand, I might add 4 SHO-10s for front heights and center surrounds to be driven by my onkyo...
Quote:
From the moment you encounter our new XPR-5 in person, you’ll know it is no ordinary power amplifier. The XPR-5 is different from anything we’ve ever done before. It’s Reference by Emotiva, and you have to see it and hear it to believe it.
The XPR-5 faceplate is made of 25 millimeters of solid billet aluminum; tooled, machined, engraved, and finished like fine jewelry. The oversized Emotiva logo is laser embossed on the faceplate, and an array of 60 dual color LEDs forms a high performance metering system that is hidden behind a smoked polycarbonate window. Five high efficiency Optimized Class H™ power amplifier modules are powered by a huge 3.3 kVA toroidal power supply with simply amazing power reserves. Jewel-like oversized, machined, and gold plated input and output connectors ensure that what goes in comes out with the highest possible fidelity. The XPR-5 is controlled, monitored, and protected by an advanced ARM-7 microprocessor with a custom operating system for absolute reliability; for what good is power without control? This philosophy is at the heart of every component in the new Emotiva Reference Series.
The XPR-5 effortlessly delivers 400 watts per channel into 8 Ohms and 600 watts per channel into 4 Ohms with all channels driven, with vanishingly low noise and distortion. But, just as importantly, it does so with grace and finesse that belies its massive power output capabilities. We’ve put over 30 years of experience into this new Emotiva Reference power amplifier, an instrument that will set a new performance standard for multichannel amplification. You must experience for yourself what unlimited headroom and control can do for your music and movies. It’s a revelation. Quite simply, the XPR-5 is a beautiful amplifier, both visually and audibly.
XPR-5 – Power. Finesse. Control.

FEATURES

A true reference quality power amplifier optimized for use in high-end
multi-channel sound systems.
Superb sound quality and massive power reserves.
Effortlessly drives complex loads with ease.
Stable with virtually all real-world speakers.
Wide band, short signal path, high current class A/B amplifier design topology.
Optimized Class H™ power supply for high operating efficiency.
Massive 3.3 kVA toroidal power supply with huge power reserves.
Audiophile-grade, gold plated, super heavy duty speaker terminals.
Independently switchable balanced (XLR) and unbalanced (RCA) inputs.
Gold-plated machined RCA input connectors.
Rugged steel chassis with reinforced construction.
High quality precision components used throughout.
Multi-element 25 mm milled solid aluminum faceplate.
Laser engraved Emotiva logo.
Exclusive Reference Series accent lighting (with variable intensity).
LED Bargraph metering system with selectable ballistics.
Channel Status LEDs indicate high temperature and fault conditions.
User selectable multi-stage Stealth Illumination Mode.
Soft Touch power button.
Fully protected from all common fault conditions.
Trigger input and output for linking to other trigger-enabled equipment.
AC line voltage operation - 115 VAC or 230 VAC (switchable).
post #5488 of 18704
Plus, the emotiva only weights a mere 96 lbs (about half the weight of the Orbit Shifter... hehe..

since we're all getting 'BIG' and 'Heavy' Speakers, why not a Giant Amp as well?
post #5489 of 18704
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

Check out this new "custom" Quintuple S2 install. http://jtrspeakers.websitetoolbox.com/post/show_single_post?pid=1275749535&postcount=9

Instantly the 'very tiny TV' stood out among the giants!
post #5490 of 18704
Here's a snippet from Audioholics Review: http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/amplifiers/emotiva-xpr-5-pre

Notice the part it compares it with a Class D

Quote:
The new Emotiva XPR-5 is a five channel, 400 watt per channel, Class A/B beast that can push up to 575 watts into one channel at 8 Ohms or 1100 watts into one channel driven at 4 Ohms. The 400 watt rating is for all channels into 8 Ohms. The XPR-5 is stable into 4 Ohms and can push 600 watts all channels driven. It does this my pairing five high efficiency Optimized Class A/B amp modules with a Class H power supply and a hulking 3.3kVA toroidal power supply. The Class-H topology greatly improves efficiency over conventional Class A/B by modulating the supply rails so that the rails are only a few volts higher than the output signal at any given time. This keeps the amplifier running cool, delivering maximum power from your wall outlet. This amplifier approaches Class D efficiency, but without the performance variations typical of Class D amps caused by increased amplifier output impedance from the output filter which is designed to eliminate out of band modulation noise.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Official JTR speaker thread