Parasound Emotiva opinion

[jinjuku]

Perhaps a pre-amp could increase the perception of detail by having a non-linear frequency response, where the some area of emphasis or de-emphasis in the spectrum highlights some detail. Of course, other than some roll-offs in very deep bass or above 16KHz I don't remember ever seeing a test report of a pre-amp that had a significantly non-linear frequency response, since about 1980. Mostly what gets added is noise and distortion, not lack of linearity. One nice thing about pre-amps, they're a lot easier to measure than power amps, and the same circumstances that make that true also make pre-amps less likely IMO to differ in sound.

That does depend on what 'more detail' means. But I seriously doubt that is what the XPS-1 is doing. Looking at the 3rd party measurements the Emotiva is doing nothing of the sort. Without having one on hand I have to armchair it and say it's transparent.

My recommendation is to get the Parasound in if possible and set it up beside the Emotiva, if a member here is local have them help, throw a towel over all of it to remove bias.

 

[sharkman]

Was it you that previously had the USP-1? How does the XSP compare?

Yes. The XSP is better. Hard to say how much, but the volume control is a big plus... What I don't get about the XSP either is the volume at mute is around -115. It takes turning up the volume close to -60 to even hear anything.... There is a lot left at +115 but still. Strange..

That seems kind of odd, minus 115 to get to mute, and then all the way up to minus 60 to hear anything. And this is the 2nd generation XSP? You'd think they would fine tune things like that. What are the volume steps, .5 db? That doesn't sound like an accurate volume design where zero is supposedly reference.

 

[ematthews]

OK. I have had almost two full days of evaluating the XSP -1 comparing it to my Marantz PM8004. Remember I am using the XSP with the XPA-2 Gen 2 amp.
XSP....
More detailed..Although it's bright sounding to me
Less bass response
Zero noise.. In the lower or soft part of songs is black silent..
PM8004
Sound is all around more full sounding to me.
Warm.
More bass. I had to turn down the Rythmik sub about two clicks.
Less fatiguing.
Noise is a little higher on soft parts of songs.
A bit more enjoyable to me.

So this means it's going back and I will most likely sell the brand new XPA-2 gen 2 amp as well.
It also means I will be looking for another set of affordable separates that have more of the warm sound to them.
Maybe Parasound is the choice.

 

[PENG]

OK. I have had almost two full days of evaluating the XSP -1 comparing it to my Marantz PM8004. Remember I am using the XSP with the XPA-2 Gen 2 amp.
XSP....
More detailed..Although it's bright sounding to me
Less bass response
Zero noise.. In the lower or soft part of songs is black silent..
PM8004
Sound is all around more full sounding to me.
Warm.
More bass. I had to turn down the Rythmik sub about two clicks.
Less fatiguing.
Noise is a little higher on soft parts of songs.
A bit more enjoyable to me.

So this means it's going back and I will most likely sell the brand new XPA-2 gen 2 amp as well.
It also means I will be looking for another set of affordable separates that have more of the warm sound to them.
Maybe Parasound is the choice.

Sorry for repeating but it really is hard for me to understand how Marantz amps would be designed to have a "warm" sound as opposed to neutral, accurate etc. So basically I don't believe that is the case. I have two pairs of Marantz amps, one for HT, one for 2 channel and I would consider them neutral sounding just like my other amps including the Parasound. I have multiple amps for reasons other than sound quality as they all sound more similar than different.

You may find the Parasound amps warm like your Marantz, if so then I would have to assume the Emos are not designed to sound neutral, and that would be incredible, given that they have rave reviews and measured so well in the labs.

I don't know how this will end for you, maybe just keep the 8004.

 

[ematthews]

8004 will always be with me. It's my bedroom system that I pulled into the main room for testing.. There is a difference...Even though the measurements would not support that. As Andrew Jones would say.... The measurements are right... Why doesn't it sound good... Back for more testing... As I will do in the next week or so before I send it back.

 

[sharkman]

Hey, I went down the rabbit hole a long time ago when I could hear an audible difference between 2 amps in my system, so I tend to believe your results. It could be as simple as the Emotiva not blending well with your speakers, in which case I'd suggest joining the Ascend forum and getting gear suggestions for your speakers. Tell them your story with emo gear. The owner there would be a great help. Too bad you can't demo Parasound gear at a dealer, but Halo solved my brightness issue. Too bad Marantz doesn't make affordable separates.

 

[jinjuku]

He should be able to get the Parasound from an outlet that has a return policy that is more than fair. It's nice that you can get the Emotiva and if it's not your cup of tea return it.

 

[PENG]

That combo of Emo pre and power amps should be able to drive most speakers including the Ascend towers and remain neutral/accurate. If they don't, or can't, then then Emo is not telling us why, and/or all those reviews and lab measurements would be questionable, but I don't believe that is the case. When you get to that level of gear, one shouldn't have to worry about synergy between amps and speakers unless one owns certain uncommon speakers. Also at this level of price point and quality of amps, brightness or warmth would be more (not saying totally) determined by the source media. Other than that, I have to say Placebo could be at work in some cases.

 

[PENG]

8004 will always be with me. It's my bedroom system that I pulled into the main room for testing.. There is a difference...Even though the measurements would not support that. As Andrew Jones would say.... The measurements are right... Why doesn't it sound good... Back for more testing... As I will do in the next week or so before I send it back.

One good test would be to bring the Emo pairs to the bedroom so you can compare them side by side with the Marantz in the same room and of course playing the same music.

 

[ematthews]

One good test would be to bring the Emo pairs to the bedroom so you can compare them side by side with the Marantz in the same room and of course playing the same music.

I have done this and the Emotiva still sounds a little more bright.

As for source material. I am using a lot of Steven Wilson's own stuff as well as Porcupine tree... His recordings are some of the best in the industry. A few may say his are the best... Just ask how many artist are asking him to redo their older stuff.... For example. YES. I am a huge fan of Steven Wilson.

 

[PENG]

I have done this and the Emotiva still sounds a little more bright.

As for source material. I am using a lot of Steven Wilson's own stuff as well as Porcupine tree... His recordings are some of the best in the industry. A few may say his are the best... Just ask how many artist are asking him to redo their older stuff.... For example. YES. I am a huge fan of Steven Wilson.

I believe the recordings could be the best in the industry but those are still mainly amplified music that is played through loudspeakers to begin with. It seems to me unamplified music such as live classical music recordings would be better for testing SQ of a home system. At least I have been to many live classical concerts so I know how they should sound if my home system is transparent. Obviously YMMV.

 

[jinjuku]

I believe the recordings could be the best in the industry but those are still mainly amplified music that is played through loudspeakers to begin with. It seems to me unamplified music such as live classical music recordings would be better for testing SQ of a home system. At least I have been to many live classical concerts so I know how they should sound if my home system is transparent. Obviously YMMV.

Have to agree with you there. I have everything from Rob Zombie, to Depeche Mode, to Tori Amos. My top 5 mastered works are all classical.

 

[sharkman]

I believe the recordings could be the best in the industry but those are still mainly amplified music that is played through loudspeakers to begin with. It seems to me unamplified music such as live classical music recordings would be better for testing SQ of a home system. At least I have been to many live classical concerts so I know how they should sound if my home system is transparent. Obviously YMMV.

To me the issue is how the system sounds with one's favorite music that's played regularly. If that sounds harsh/bright, then he'll be putting up with it every day. And if his Marantz handles it better, then it stands to reason that to his ears, with his system in his room with the same tracks, there is a difference to him. I know I'm considered off the reservation here among some, and I hope I'm not irritating anybody, but I think the best thing to do here is just compare the Emotiva and Marantz and if a difference is reliably apparent to him, then so be it. There is no gain for one to attempt to prove anything or please strangers on the internet.

 

[jinjuku]

I don't think PENG was making a comment as it pertains to the hardware. I think he was just speaking in generalities about where some really well mastered music is available.

Agreed that if you aren't into classical music then maybe using it as a source for evaluation may not be what you should be doing. I have a piece by Dweezil Zappa that he did on a HORRIBLE album called Angelica that I use the first 1:51 for evaluation. It's heavy electric guitar/electronica but well done. So even though it's not my cup of tea it's a gold standard for when I evaluate speakers.

 

[PENG]

And if his Marantz handles it better, then it stands to reason that to his ears, with his system in his room with the same tracks, there is a difference to him.

Of course, that is obviously logical so we are in agreement. I thought from his previous post, that he realizes in an absolute sense the Marantz maybe the one coloring the sound, i.e. warmer/darker and the Emo maybe more neutral or accurate. So I am suggesting that part of the puzzle is easier to tell if he uses unamplified music so his system would have better chance in trying to replicate the sound of the music instruments heard live or in the recording studios instead of through more electronics and loudspeakers that may color the sound to begin with. There would still be electronics involved in the recording/mastering process but would be less overall. If he has no interest in finding out which amps are on the neutral/accurate side then such excercise would be a total waste of his time.

I know I'm considered off the reservation here among some, and I hope I'm not irritating anybody

I see no evidence of that at all, not to me anyway. We all hear and perceive differently and this is just a hobby that involves so many variables. I do think you maybe a touch more prone to Placebo, or it may have nothing to do with that at all.

but I think the best thing to do here is just compare the Emotiva and Marantz and if a difference is reliably apparent to him, then so be it.

I am in 100% agreement.

There is no gain for one to attempt to prove anything or please strangers on the internet.

You are absolutely right, this is just an AV forum, but that's stating the obvious again.

 

[RichB]

Since this is the Parasound Emotiva Option thread, it may be time to try a Parasound (where return is an option).
I have no personal experience with Emotiva, but the Parasound amps do what amps should do, and not much of what they shouldn't.

- Rich

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

OK. I have had almost two full days of evaluating the XSP -1 comparing it to my Marantz PM8004. Remember I am using the XSP with the XPA-2 Gen 2 amp.
XSP....
More detailed..Although it's bright sounding to me
Less bass response
Zero noise.. In the lower or soft part of songs is black silent..
PM8004
Sound is all around more full sounding to me.
Warm.
More bass. I had to turn down the Rythmik sub about two clicks.
Less fatiguing.
Noise is a little higher on soft parts of songs.
A bit more enjoyable to me.

So this means it's going back and I will most likely sell the brand new XPA-2 gen 2 amp as well.
It also means I will be looking for another set of affordable separates that have more of the warm sound to them.
Maybe Parasound is the choice.

I assume the comparison was done with all volume level-matched and all processing bypassed (Audyssey, DEQ, etc.) ?

Did you compare the 2 different room correction software between Marantz & EMO?

 

[RichB]

I assume the comparison was done with all volume level-matched and all processing bypassed (Audyssey, DEQ, etc.) ?

Did you compare the 2 different room correction software between Marantz & EMO?

The XPS-1 is a analog preamp:

The Emotiva XSP-1 Differential Reference Preamp | Emotiva Audio | Emotiva Audio | High-end audio components for audiophiles and videophiles, spanning 2-channel music systems, as well as 5.1 and 7.1 home theaters. Products include multichannel amplifi

He only has to worry about the Marantz settings.
Marantz should be Pure Direct and LFE+Main OFF (if that model has that setting).

- Rich

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

it may be time to try a Parasound

That's kind of what most of us were expecting before the EMO sidetrack.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The XPS-1 is a analog preamp

Doh! My bad.

Worse than I thought then. I thought he was comparing one pre-pro to another pre-pro, not one analog preamp to a pre-pro.

I would never buy another analog preamp. In my mind, the analog preamp is filed under "obsolete" along with the Vinyl player and such.