EMOTIVA Thread Q&A [TECHNICAL TALK ONLY] - Page 159

OK...maybe my post can break the recent exchanges.

I am going back and forth between emotiva separates (likely the MMC 1 and UPA 7 when both are available) vs. a Marantz AVR (6003 or 8002) with the possibility of adding an emotiva XPA 3 in the future. I have the Mirage OMD line as my 7.1 setup which are each rated at 6 ohms nominal, decent sensitivity around 90-93db across the different speakers.



I don't typically blast the volume, around -35 DB is plenty for me so I guess its more about clarity than volume. I prefer about 60/40 movies vs music.

The overall wattage would be very close with either setup but my question is would the sound difference be very noticeable between the 2? If I went the AVR route and then eventually decide to add an amp would I have been better off going with the Emotiva separates in the first place? Any comments appreciated!

Tim

Huh? I guess 37 is really young...

We have something in common - I work at home as well with my "small business" on the computer.

Anyways...enough is enough...thanks for all the help...I really DO mean it! And thanks to everyone else is well.

Let's just keep things about AUDIO...regardless if a question is repeated - the key is to getting answers (preferrably more than one).

Hmm...interesting...

All I know is that the Marantz AVRs got EXCELLENT reviews online and from dealers I visited during my AVR hunt.

I didn't go with the Marantz - simply because of it lacking a lot of "future-proofing" features (HDMI ins and outs, Ethernet port, outdated GUI, etc...), but the sound quality was excellent.

GL

Thanks for your reply.

Although you have a point, some manufacturers don't utilize Chinese labor. True, many do, but some do not. ATI is American made (and they make many "hi-end" amps as well, like Theta, Lexicon, among others).

Quality of automobiles is irrelevant here. Many Asian companies have their cars manufactured here.....Honda, Toyota, Subaru, Hyundai, etc.

And I'm not talking about made in America. I'm only hesitant about Emotiva because of the one parameter that cannot be talked about in reviews....reliability. For that, I want to hear from end-users.

I understand what you are saying and it is true many Asian companies use assembly lines here. But another question I have is that while hi-end audio gear might be manufactured here, do we really know where the components inside of the equipment were made? How many things are solely the product of just one country? For example, some gear says that it is designed or engineered in America but from parts made in China.

I assume you mean the UMC-1, the MMC-1 is discontinued. Though you would probably not be able to get a UMC-1 until the fall, given the preorders and other pent up demand (at least unless a bunch more of those cheap Onkyo 885Ps shows up).

Could you be a bit more specific on the speakers, there's a number of models in the OMD lineup. IMHO there's three questions you need to answer, in order to determine whether or not you'll benefit from an external amp.

1) Low resistance - 4 ohm or lower
2) Low efficiency - under 91 db or so
3) Substantial Bass - Some sort of woofer larger than 5"-6" or at least several of them.

You are marginal on the first, no on the second and I can't answer the third. So you might see some benefit, but it would hang on question 3.

In any case, if you are using an AVR to drive rear/surround channels, there's rarely a case for getting an amp to drive anything other than the Mains and possibly the center channel speaker.


Clarity is on of those "adjectives" people like to ascribe to amps. I believe that sort of thing is mostly in the believer's head, but YMMV.


The thing about Pre/Pros vs AVRs is that the AVRs are updated more frequently and even "low cost" pre/pros are more expensive than the majority of AVRs. So if you are the sort of person who buys an AVR every year or two in order to get the latest and greatest, you will not only have to wait longer, but will also pay significantly more.

I was wrong about your age...

Audio only....why didn't you buy a pro amp again?

Thanks for the reply here are my responses to your questions. You are correct I had the models mixed up and meant the UMC-1. The wait until fall makes it a bit more difficult, not sure I can hang in there that long and leave the speakers sitting idle

Right now I have the 6 OMD5s and an OMDC1 but am planning replacing my fronts with the OMD 15s which have 5.5" woofers.

I have upgraded my AVR every about every 6 years which to me is a good balance of not throwing money away but not missing out on new technology. Based on your comments I might be inclined to start with the Marantz and then I can always add more power later via an XPA 3 for the fronts. Let me know if that makes sense...thanks!

Makes sense.

That was my initial original plan. I was going to go 6003 and add the XPA-3.

So you don't have anything now? Yeah, that could be a problem


The 15's do sound like they could benefit, the 5's not so much. But you would probably want to look at an XPA rather than a UPA. Since you are going to need about x2 the power of an AVR to really see any benefit from an external amp.


Makes sense to me. You might want to consider going with a very low cost AVR and then selling it if you decide you really like the UMC-1. You can always sell it and probably get back half or so, of what you paid. Which for a $250-300 unit + $700 (UMC-1) is not a horrible increase in cost. Though many of the very low cost units don't have pre-outs for use with an external amp.

Besides there's bound to be at least a couple of people who decide they don't like the UMC-1 and want to sell it. So that's another possibility.

Makes sense to me. You might want to consider going with a very low cost AVR and then selling it if you decide you really like the UMC-1. You can always sell it and probably get back half or so, of what you paid. Which for a $250-300 unit + $700 (UMC-1) is not a horrible increase in cost. Though many of the very low cost units don't have pre-outs for use with an external amp.

Besides there's bound to be at least a couple of people who decide they don't like the UMC-1 and want to sell it. So that's another possibility.[/quote]

Thanks that really helps with the decision.

I'll probably go with the Marantz when I find a competitive price and then add an XPA down the road. That should some money instead of going with a UMC and XPA 3 + 5 or someother combination of amps which would be necessary to truely make a difference with the OMD 15's.

The 885 pre/pro is for sale in the for sale forum on this site...you might consider that if you really want a pre/pro with external amps.

IF you think you might go with the UMC-1 or another pre-pro, then I would probably get the XPA-5 rather than 3. Since you'll need the extra channels and it's only $200 more (less if you can grab it on sale).

Even with the XPA 5 I would still need 2 more channels which is why I was thinking XPA 5+3 or XPA 5 + 2.

The UPA-2 is more than sufficient for a pair of surround channels. Especially with what you'd be using for surrounds. And you'd be saving $300-$500.

The iPhone is made in China too.

If you want first hand reviews, check out the Emotiva forums:

http://emotivalounge.proboards.com/index.cgi?


I've only had my XPA-5 since Christmas but as someone else already stated, the build quality is superb and the amp does what it is suppose to do. I'm very happy.

Marantz 6003 + Xpa5. Problem solved. Let the 6003 power the almost useless (at this time) Surround back L/R channels. It has more than enough power for this application.

You might even get away with the 6003 + XPA-3. That is if money is tight. The 6003 is definitely well rated for its power and can power 2-4 surrounds.

+1

I have this setup, and the UPA-2 provides PLENTY of power for the surrounds. If you are using an AVR as a pre/pro, I would suggest using the AVR's internal amps for the surrounds. Either an XPA-3 or XPA-5 would work pretty much indefinitely in this application.

The XPA-5 is a better deal, and gives you more power for the side surrounds, IMO. I used this configuration with a XPA-5 for several months and was happy with the results. I added the UPA-2 to my XPA-5 when it went on sale in anticipation of the UMC-1 replacing my AVR.

BTW, I just received my Onkyo PR-SC885 pre/pro from FedEx a few minutes ago. Just couldn't turn down the close-out deal on this proven, full-featured pre/pro with balanced inputs. I think I'll skip the UMC-1 and wait on the XMC-1...whenever it arrives.

Whatever you decide, you cannot go wrong with either the XPA-3 or XPA-5 and your AVR.

RE: many parameters important in amp comparisons

Just for those that may not know it exists, here are 2 Emotiva Amp comparison charts.
It might not have all important factors (eg reliability), but does allow for some comparison and recognition that more than one factor is important as a surrogate marker of quality and sound.

Link


Mike

 

Emotiva Amp comparison - st Gen - vers 4-8-09.pdf 76.3466796875k . file

I like this thread, but frankly, I am getting tired of reading posts stating the UPA series is fine for surrounds, but not for the mains/center. So I have a challenge: for those with an XPA and UPA, go ahead and have your friends/family help you set up a blind listening test for you. The only caveat is that the person swapping in/out amps makes sure the output from the AVR (or pre/pro) is calibrated such that each amp puts out the same SPL given the same input signal.

Reply back with the SPL used for the listening session. I am willing to bet that you guys won't be able to discern a difference.

-T

hehe, stop that sort of nonsense

Most people looking for an external amp want substantially more power than the AVRs output and the UPAs don't do that. I'm sure the XPAs are overkill 90% of the time, but given the $200 price difference between the XPA-5 and the UPA-7 (less if XPA-5 is on sale and the UPA-7 isn't) and that 5 channel is the dominant speaker config, why not go with the XPA-5?

We're talking about differences in price in the handful of hundreds. Not thousands of dollars.

Cost difference is not the point. Folks here generally slam the UPA simply because power output is not as high as the XPA series. Seems illogical, and not based on anything other than the "125W is less than 200W = Not as Good" mentality.

As for channels, sure, a guy with a 5.1 system with no intention of 7.1 should probably get the XPA-5. But guys slamming the UPA series are using the "not enough power" reason, and not the channels/cost reasons.

Bring on the Blind Test Results!!

-T

Just let it go. How is all this ranting staying on topic.

Thing is, if you have speakers that will be driven to their limits by 125 wpc, then 95% of the time, you probably don't need an external amp at all.

Personally, I think they should put out a UPA-5 at $450 or so, not a UPA-7 at $600. The UPA-7 is too close to the XPA-3/5 in price, without any advantages other than number of channels and most people who have a 7.1 system want more than 125 wpc for their mains at least.


We are discussing why someone should get one emotiva amp vs another emotiva amp. How is that not on topic?

unless you have a pre/pro that has no amp

Edit: furthermore if the UMC-1 was out on time a UMC-1/UPA-7 could be a very sweet setup at a very good price point.

I posted the word Emotiva in all replies

I think they do. Most AVR's don't publish the true specs. Here's an earlier post regarding Sony's $2000 receiver:


The UPA-7 delivers 125 watts with 7 channels driven. Compare that to this Sony (and many others) that delivers on 45 watts. You don't think that's substantially more power (3 times as much)?

I agree that a UPA-7 is a great compliment to an AV receiver with "inflated" power numbers. I have one paired with a Sony 5300ES and it supplements it well. During normal TV use there is not that much difference.....throw in a BluRay during movie night and it wakes up my DefTechs nicely.