EMOTIVA Thread [TECHNICAL TALK ONLY] - Page 48

Not entirely accurate, joerod. The LPA-2 is a true 7 channel, equal power amp. The LPA-1 is 5x125, 2x50 I believe. The LPA-1 price increase is definately worth it. However, if you only need 5 channels, the XPA-5 is an amazing piece of equipment!

I am just reporting what Nick from Emotiva told me this morning. Depending on one's set up the LPA-1 can get the job done to...

The LPA-1 can get the job done!

I had one, and pretty quickly found myself buying the MPS-1. Not because I didn't like the LPA, but because I did like it! And I LOVE my MPS!

Awesome! Emotiva makes some good stuff...

The LPA-1 is more than sufficient in almost every case, but the LPA-2(I think its now called the UPA-7 though) will just have that extra power for the people who for example use tower speakers as rears. If you dont then get the LPA-1. If you only run a 5.1 then the XPA-5 is phenominal, but in most cases probably not needed, but at least it gives you bigger balls

I am thrilled with my XPA 5s! Just breaking them in...

I posted in this thread some time ago and hadn't really kept up with it. I've been following Emotiva over at their forum and the new lines look awesome. I think this year will be the year for me.

I agree. I'm looking to put together a decent surround setup by using the Theater Bypass mode in my 2 channel system. I've picked up a center and surrounds to compliment my mains and have been holding off for the next gen. I am pretty sure I'm going to preorder the UMC-1, I don't think that anything will be able to touch it for the money.

I plan to use my onkyo 905 as my prepro for awhile but will definitely audition their new prepro. I was thinking about swapping it out for the onkyo 885 Pro but it would be just about an even swap. So I am not so sure it is worth all the effort since they are pretty much the same soundwise. Also, I have the 905 all updated and fully set up. Not that I could not just do it all over again with a 885 Pro... Anyway, I would suspect the 905 will get the job done as a prepro until I am ready to look at something else...

I'm in EXACTLY the same boat as you. I have a 7.1 system, and just bought an Anthem P5 (5-channel amp). So I'm usiing 2-amps from the 905, but it's mostly a pre-pro now.

I really want the balanced outputs, but the Integra 9.8 or Onkyo Pro 885 just doesn't seem worth it, as that's pretty much all I'd be getting. If they let the user do the Audyssey Pro stuff, then it would be worth it, but they won't, and I don't want to pay someone to come to my house every time I want to play with my soundstage.

I was looking at the Anthem D2, but it's too old at this point (no 8-channel PCM over HDMI).

I was also looking at the Denon high-end one, but a $7K Denon just seems rediculous. It's always seemed like a Best Buy brand to me. For $2K, maybe, but not $7K (with not much more than the 9.8/885 gives us).

Are there any other pre-pro's you've been looking at, that would be an upgrade from the 905/885/9.8?

What ever you do...stop breaking your amp

As of now I think we should just sit tight and wait to see what the Fall brings us. Our onkyo receivers can do the job until the next big thing comes. I agree, it seems like switching to the 885 Pro would be an exact lateral move...

Nice Amp!.....I have a P2 and love it. I wish they made a P3. That P5 is a beast! I almost went that route, but felt it would be a waste on four inceiling Polk surrounds (top of the line, but still surrounds). I am still using my MPS-1 for the center and surround channels and use the channels replaced by the P2 for Zone 2 outdoor speakers. I haven't had a chance to listen to anything outside yet, but I thinik there should be an improvement over my old Denon integrated amp. The P2 made a very noticeable improvement over my MPS-1, but it costs a lot more.

I actually just bought a D2 and should be getting it this week. I traded up from an AVM50 because I wanted to see if I would gain improvements in 2 channel sound and I want to use the ARC-1. I also did not want to give up on the video processing ability of the Anthems. I am not sure if you can get another prepro with the flexibilty on the video processing side that the Anthem exhibits (unless you get a seperate video processor). I would love a prepro with 7.1 ability, but right now there are only a few 7.1 sources out there and to use all 7 channels, things will be matrixed in. I am sure that will change in the future though.

I still feel for the money, Emotiva is awesome. I still have my DMC-1 and plan to keep it for a second system. I just need to add an amp, most likely a newer, less powerful Emotiva than the MPS-1 (driving some on wall Polks). For the price of a mid range receiver you can have seperates that sound great.

I've been thinking of picking a refurb H/K 247 from Harman Audio and picking up a LPA-1 to drive some Infinity Primus 360's and 150's (5.1 setup) as one of my options. My other options is to buy an Onkyo 805 or Marantz SR7001.

I think the power in the LPA-1 is more than enough for my speakers but more importantly is a better quality of power over the 805 or 7001. Is my thinking wrong?

Reason for the H/K 247 is to get a hdmi reciever with pre-outs.

As long as your equipment can benefit from the extra clean juice, I agree with you. The best thing is down the line, you can still run the amp and upgrade the receiver/prepro to improve things even more.

Ok, im looking to replace my LMC-1 soon. Does anyone use their emotiva amps with a yamaha as a processor? Intereted in if people think they combine for a good match or not. Im looking into getting the V663, V863, or V1800. Anyone use any of these units, or use any yamaha as a processor? Thanks!

Received an e-mail from Emotiva indicating the XPA-2 is likely to ship in the 1st half of May.

XPA-5's are in stock right now, if anyone wanted to buy.

I have my eye on them, but have neither the space for them on my entertainment rack nor the space to fill with the upgrade of power in my current apartment. If I got those and wanted to take advantage of the 200 watts/channel my neighbors might literally murder me in my sleep...and steal my electronics. lol.

People are hung up on watts. 125W is just about as great as 200W and depending on your speakers and room even 125W is extreme overkill.

Example:
Klipsch RF-7 LR channels in my home theater. They are rated 102 dB @ 2.83V/meter.

What does 2.83V tell you? Well Power is V^2 / R. 2.83 squared divided by 8 Ohm speakers. This is 1W. That means my highly efficient 102 dB/W at 1 meter speakers put out 102 dB with only 1 Watt.

2nd example is my "poor" rear channels. They are rated 92 dB/W. To get the same 102 dB out of them I have to add more Watts. Each power doubling adds 3 dB. Therefore 95 dB requires 2W, 98 dB requires 4W, 101 dB requires 8W and finally 102 dB requires about 10W.

These ratings are at 1 meter distance. Sound pressure falls off with increasing distance. At 21 feet I lose 16 dB (my theater rear seating position from those RF-7's)

For comfortable listening (according to OHSA) 97 dB can only be tolerated for 3 hours, more than enough for a movie or CD.

To get 97 dB with my speakers and positioning I only need 4W! The difference between 125W and 200W with these speakers would be lost on the people who would be deaf at those levels. Not even 3dB difference in sound pressure level.

Look here for all your dB needs for your own room.

http://myhometheater.homestead.com/splcalculator.html

^^^ True enough.

FWIW, I regularly lit up the LED's on my Carver (200w @8ohm) cube when using my original Advents (86dB ish @ 1 w/m.) I was never able to light up those LEDs once I replaced the Advents with JBL L100t's (91dB) at any tolerable listening level ... and I did try.

OTOH, there is transient headroom to consider ...

Yes the headroom. Most amps rate power as continous and then go on to rate transient as being 50% to 100% more for short durations. Those explosions in movies. This is why they fill them with capacitors in the 100,000 uF range. They are energy reserves for those massive power spikes.

I think people get hung up on Watts more than is necessary ... unless you have cheap speakers from yester year that are only 70 dB/W efficient.

i agree with you for sure, but i think your making it seem like headroom is just not necessary. Some speakers DO require some juice to really get them to sing and generally some of your better quality amps on the market these days are going to have that power whether you need it or not. But as you stated before there is minimal difference between 125-200 watts....then again i really think it depends on what speakers your driving, but the majority of speakers on the market dont need 100000000 watts lol. ::Edit:: unless your the guy who was featured this week on the AVS homepage who had over 40 McIntosh pieces working together and invested 1.1 million into his setup...

Many electostats fall into that category of "power hungry to sing"

I'm a fan of Totem Acoustics myself, and the combination with my LPA1 is superb.

michael

great example, and its not just raw power they desire, they need an overall clean and smoothe running amp if you desire the best results.

Just to chime in with my experience...

I just recently received an XPA-5 (3 days after ordering) to replace my Adcom GFA-545 II to drive Polk LSi 15s. Although it's not a very fair comparison, the improvement in sound is astounding. The LSi are notoriously power hungry and this amp opened them up to levels far beyond my expectations. Nothing but positive things to say about the products and the company, I'll be patiently waiting for the next gen processors to come out and replacing my Marantz SR5500.

The XPA-2 and XPA-5 are both $800. The -2 does 250x2, while the -5 does 200x5. Overall the specs look about the same, except the -2 has 2x the "secondary capacitance," which I am assuming means power reserve for transients. The -2 also weighs 5 pounds more than the -5.

Other than these things, what would the main differences be, like in sound quality, power, etc.? Why would $800 for 250x2 be better than 200x5?


And between the LPA-1 and XPA-5, has anyone felt that the LPA-1 wasn't "enough"?
I'm running 3 Ascend 340SEs across the front, crossed at 90Hz to a HSU VTF-3 Mk2 (w/ an eq), with 170SEs in the back. I listen to a lot of music, as well as a lot of movies. For movie watching I'm usually at about -10 to -5 on the dial. Right now I'm running a Sony 5300ES receiver (120x7, but at higher THD than the Emotivas), and like having 6 HDMI inputs for all my sources. Mainly I'm interested in better 2.1 channel music performance, with a secondary benefit of better movie audio performance.

A good 2-channel amp will outperform a 5-channel amp all day long. This will be the case for the XPA-2. Now the XPA-2 would be WAY overkill for your Ascend 340SEs...Think something that needs alot of power to sing like Martin Logans....

I think you would be better suited with the RPA-2. Its 200x2 but is a class H amp and it has complelely separate amps unline the class A/B. The RPA-2 is supposed to create great separation between instruments and produce a much cleaner, refined type of sound. The Xpa-2 is a juggernaut. Meant to make cities implode (think HT or extremely power hungry speakers)

Now the sony that you use is rated at 120x7, but in reality this is not the case. If properly bench tested it will most likely put out about 70-80 watts per channel. A standalone amp will destroy a integrated one any day of the week.

I currently own a LPA-1. Now i think its plenty of kick for my speakers. But if your looking for a little more finesse or more power, Think RPA-2 or XPA-2 respectively for the fronts. Hope this helps.

That's not unversally true. It depends more on the transformers (shared or dedicated) and power supply's and everything else inside. Higher-end 5-channel amps can easily out perform 2-channel amps, and can be equal to their 2-channel counterparts.

QFT

Quantum Field Theory?