Emotiva UPA-500 Five Channel Power Amplifier Review

[j_garcia]

To be fair, THX Select is only a certification for relatively small rooms, ie under 2000 cubic feet. Even in this case, it is only supposed to be "enough" power when driving THX Select certified speakers or speakers comparable in impedance and sensitivity to the THX spec.

This was in a 14x14 bedroom; just under 2Kcf.

That a speaker is a bookshelf model is no indicator of how difficult it may be for an amplifier to drive. As an example, the Klipsch P17B dips below 3 ohms from 128-265 Hz, and is fairly reactive to boot. Even a THX Ultra certified receiver isn't meant to handle that kind of load.

I tried it with a few different ones that had no problem being driven to much higher levels without audible distortion with my 95W PM7200. One pair I am rebuilding (my A/V-1s), but in that configuration would have been 8 Ohms and 88dB sensitive. The other pair were Mordaunt Short 902s, 8 Ohm 89dB sensitive.

 

[Steve81]

I tried it with a few different ones that had no problem being driven to much higher levels without audible distortion with my 95W PM7200.

Is that terribly shocking though? An Onkyo TX-SR616 for example is THX Select certified and weighs in at a whopping 24.3 pounds. With that you get 7 channels of amplification, and all the modern amenities needed to operate a home theater. Your Marantz is about 27 pounds and all of it is dedicated to driving two channels, and nothing else. It shouldn't be any big surprise that the Marantz can drive something a bit more challenging than an 8 ohm resistor with more authority than the aforementioned Onk.

One pair I am rebuilding (my A/V-1s), but in that configuration would have been 8 Ohms and 88dB sensitive. The other pair were Mordaunt Short 902s, 8 Ohm 89dB sensitive.

What can I say, nominal ohm ratings touted by manufacturers are typically about as useful as a poopy flavored lolly pop. So are sensitivity ratings for that matter. You know how it is. There are lies, damned lies, and manufacturers specifications.

 

[bootman]

UMC has been discontinued now anyway. Time to start hassling Gene to review the XSP-1 and the XMC

There is the UMC-200 that is coming soon.
HDMI 1.4 pure passthrough design.

 

[slipperybidness]

There is the UMC-200 that is coming soon.
HDMI 1.4 pure passthrough design.

Please provide a link to this. Google didn't seem to show anything on a UMC-200. You sure about that?

 

[bootman]

Please provide a link to this. Google didn't seem to show anything on a UMC-200. You sure about that?

Here is one of Big Dan mentioning the unit in a UPA-500 thread and the Ultra line in general.

The Emotiva Lounge - UPA-500

Proboard's search function is REALLY bad, so I'll try and dig up some more.


EDIT:
I found a link mentioning the prototype that was shown at Emofest last year.
http://emotivalounge.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=updates&thread=19448&page=26#314914

 

[slipperybidness]

Here is one of Big Dan mentioning the unit in a UPA-500 thread and the Ultra line in general.

The Emotiva Lounge - UPA-500

Proboard's search function is REALLY bad, so I'll try and dig up some more.


EDIT:
I found a link mentioning the prototype that was shown at Emofest last year.
The Emotiva Lounge - Official Emofest 2011 Thread!

Thanks for the response. Yeah, I read up on the Emo forums too, but somehow that was completely off my radar. So, you were correct.

But, the 2nd link you posted does mention that it was a prototype to help work out the HDMI 1.4 issues and they don't know if it will release or not. I wonder if it became the XMC?

 

[j_garcia]

Is that terribly shocking though? An Onkyo TX-SR616 for example is THX Select certified and weighs in at a whopping 24.3 pounds. With that you get 7 channels of amplification, and all the modern amenities needed to operate a home theater. Your Marantz is about 27 pounds and all of it is dedicated to driving two channels, and nothing else. It shouldn't be any big surprise that the Marantz can drive something a bit more challenging than an 8 ohm resistor with more authority than the aforementioned Onk.

Yeah, I know The PM actually benched at 105W, so it puts out more than claimed, and yes, it has massive caps and heat sinks.

What can I say, nominal ohm ratings touted by manufacturers are typically about as useful as a poopy flavored lolly pop. So are sensitivity ratings for that matter. You know how it is. There are lies, damned lies, and manufacturers specifications.

I had driven the 902s with a lot of different amps, so I know they are fairly easy to drive. The A/V-1s are a little difficult, but still not such a massive draw, though they do dip down to around 2.5Ohms IIRC. My current receiver is 42lbs in a ~4000cf room and it struggles for the levels I want out of my 4 Ohm speakers, which is why it is only a Pre-

 

[Steve81]

The A/V-1s are a little difficult, but still not such a massive draw, though they do dip down to around 2.5Ohms IIRC. My current receiver is 42lbs in a ~4000cf room and it struggles for the levels I want out of my 4 Ohm speakers, which is why it is only a Pre-

Ouch! A little difficult you say

That's why I'm quite happy with Klipsch in my basement HT. Of course I've got some fairly low sensitivity bookshelves (~85dB w/ 2.83V) in the bedroom, but they're a fairly easy load in terms of impedance and phase, and I'm not demanding high SPLs there.

 

[j_garcia]

Ouch! A little difficult you say

That's why I'm quite happy with Klipsch in my basement HT. Of course I've got some fairly low sensitivity bookshelves (~85dB w/ 2.83V) in the bedroom, but they're a fairly easy load in terms of impedance and phase, and I'm not demanding high SPLs there.

D'oh. 2.5ohms was for my 4 Ohm mains The A/V-1s dip to 6.8 Ohms. 2.5 to 8 nominal would have been a *small* swing

 

[bootman]

Thanks for the response. Yeah, I read up on the Emo forums too, but somehow that was completely off my radar. So, you were correct.

But, the 2nd link you posted does mention that it was a prototype to help work out the HDMI 1.4 issues and they don't know if it will release or not. I wonder if it became the XMC?

The XMC is a whole different animal.
My guess would be this is what the UMC-200 is since it is basically a HDMI board change.

 

[Steve81]

Revisiting this, one quick comment: I wish we could have seen what this could have done with 4 ohms ACD. It's rated to deliver 120 watts into 4 ohms (presumably at 1kHz) with 0.01% THD, all channels driven. With 2 channels driven, its pushing 125 watts into 4 ohms at 1kHz with 0.1% THD, which doesn't elicit a lot of confidence that it will meet the ACD spec, although it's possible. Still, mostly curious as that's what's supposed to separate the men from the boys (in some people's view in any case).

 

[sharkman]

I'm with you on that. There isn't an all channels driven test from 20-20,000khz at .1%THD either. If memory serves, the old UPA amps didn't receive this type of testing from reviewers either. Emotiva has just released the UPA-700 and they aren't releasing the transformer size on the product pages. Nice little amps, but I think if you have a serious AVR you won't be upgrading with any of these amps.

 

[gene]

Revisiting this, one quick comment: I wish we could have seen what this could have done with 4 ohms ACD. It's rated to deliver 120 watts into 4 ohms (presumably at 1kHz) with 0.01% THD, all channels driven. With 2 channels driven, its pushing 125 watts into 4 ohms at 1kHz with 0.1% THD, which doesn't elicit a lot of confidence that it will meet the ACD spec, although it's possible. Still, mostly curious as that's what's supposed to separate the men from the boys (in some people's view in any case).

I do full bandwidth tests with 2CH driven something hardly anyone does. It's simply ridiculous to do full bandwidth testing with all channels driven, especially into 4 ohms.

1Khz power sweep makes a lot more sense and its what EVERY review magazine that measures does and it's what we do.

I also do dynamic burst tests with 2CH and sometimes ACD.

 

[Steve81]

Hi Gene,

I was asking for a 1kHz sweep into 5 channels at 4 ohms, as Emo (presumably) specifies output this way as well as 1kHz into 5 channels at 8 ohms. You did the 1kHz sweep, 5 ch driven into 8 ohms, but not 4, and was just curious to see if they'd meet spec at 4 ohms as well.

 

[gene]

Hi Gene,

I was asking for a 1kHz sweep into 5 channels at 4 ohms, as Emo (presumably) specifies output this way as well as 1kHz into 5 channels at 8 ohms. You did the 1kHz sweep, 5 ch driven into 8 ohms, but not 4, and was just curious to see if they'd meet spec at 4 ohms as well.

Yea I tend NOT to do that on smaller amps like these. I did do it for 2CH I believe though. Someone buying a $400 amp isn't likely going to be using 5 4-ohm speakers. It's doubtful that amp can meet spec into 4 ohms with all channels driven without using a VARIAC to hold the line voltage constant.

 

[Steve81]

Yea I tend NOT to do that on smaller amps like these. I did do it for 2CH I believe though...It's doubtful that amp can meet spec into 4 ohms with all channels driven without using a VARIAC to hold the line voltage constant.

Fair enough. It didn't meet spec into 8 ohms with ACD either, though you noted that a VARIAC would have likely boosted the rating.

Someone buying a $400 amp isn't likely going to be using 5 4-ohm speakers.

Certainly understandable. I'm a mixture of paranoid and OCD when it comes to this stuff, so when I'm trying to figure out how loud I can push things (theoretically anyway) I tend to assume speakers are 6 or 4 ohm since most mfrs aren't just handing out impedance plots, and I like to be somewhat conservative. As an aside, I never really thought about how much more amperage from the power supply it took to drive 5 channels to 100 watts than 1 channel at 500 watts till I did that. Into 4 ohms, the difference is 25 amperes versus ~11.

 

[sharkman]

I do full bandwidth tests with 2CH driven something hardly anyone does. It's simply ridiculous to do full bandwidth testing with all channels driven.

Hi Gene,

What these ACD full bandwidth tests do is demonstrate whether the amp in question can do what the manufacturer says it can do, that's why I like them. I may be out of touch, but us little guys have no way of verifying what these manufacturers are saying their products can do. I like Reagan's old line, "Trust, but verify". If an amp is advertised at 80 watts by 5 channels, then it should be able to put out 80 watts x 5 channels to my way of thinking.

These amps may or may not be used with 4 ohm speaker systems, but Emotiva's speaker line is all 4 ohm. I don't know, however, if they recommend the UPA amps with their speaker lines.

 

[gene]

Hi Gene,

What these ACD full bandwidth tests do is demonstrate whether the amp in question can do what the manufacturer says it can do, that's why I like them. I may be out of touch, but us little guys have no way of verifying what these manufacturers are saying their products can do. I like Reagan's old line, "Trust, but verify". If an amp is advertised at 80 watts by 5 channels, then it should be able to put out 80 watts x 5 channels to my way of thinking.

These amps may or may not be used with 4 ohm speaker systems, but Emotiva's speaker line is all 4 ohm. I don't know, however, if they recommend the UPA amps with their speaker lines.

No what a full bandwidth ACD test verifies is an unrealistic test condition that would never occur in real life. EVERYONE that does ACD testing does it at 1kHz. I do that too, but I also do full bandwidth for up to two channels per FTC standard.

Read: The All Channels Driven (ACD) Amplifier Test — Reviews and News from Audioholics

 

[PENG]

Hi Gene,

If an amp is advertised at 80 watts by 5 channels, then it should be able to put out 80 watts x 5 channels to my way of thinking.

Amps, yes but I have not seen too many AVR advertised their rated watts with all channels driven. I am sure some do but not many. From honesty stand point, I agree they should do what they say they can do though as Gene said it is not realistic. I also think it is not practical, border on stupid, to do say 80WX7 ACD instead of aiming to achieve 2X120W but only 60X7, as the latter will perform better in real life situations.

 

[KEW]

Amps, yes but I have not seen too many AVR advertised their rated watts with all channels driven. I am sure some do but not many. From honesty stand point, I agree they should do what they say they can do though as Gene said it is not realistic. I also think it is not practical, border on stupid, to do say 80WX7 ACD instead of aiming to achieve 2X120W but only 60X7, as the latter will perform better in real life situations.

I'd have to disagree with this statement somewhat. I frequently see AVR's (and HTiB especially) advertised as a 500 watt receiver/system because the rating is 5 channels and 100WPC. As an example:

RXV371 | Yamaha 500-Watt 3D 5.1 Channel Home Theater Receiver | hhgregg

In all fairness, I believe it is the retailer and not the manufacturer that does this; however, it is easy to see where any reasonable person would presume a receiver could produce the spec with ACD.