Emo XSP1 Gen2 Vs Parasound P5

Drake5

erniejade wrote: »

Amazing what the cable can do!! Folks we have another believer!!!

@erniejade funny you mention this as I am now in full cable replace mode. After the revelation that an interconnect makes a difference I was itching for the speaker cable replacement and is now demoing a clearday shotgun. Fantastic sounding solid silver core cable, music is so natural and transparent and not in your face, really no fatigue. I might spring for the doubleshotgun as my final cable selection. I think I'm settled after this as I don't see a need for other upgrades... for now...

tratliff

I have been running a P3 for a couple of years. Just purchased the P5 about 2 months ago. Both of them are great pre's with my Parasound amp but the P5 has more depth and digs way deeper.

My biggest complaint with the P3 was the digital volume control. I prefer the analog control on the P5 much more.

Overall they are both nice for the price.

[Deleted User]

Thanks this is very helpful.

tratliff wrote: »

I have been running a P3 for a couple of years. Just purchased the P5 about 2 months ago. Both of them are great pre's with my Parasound amp but the P5 has more depth and digs way deeper.

My biggest complaint with the P3 was the digital volume control. I prefer the analog control on the P5 much more.

Overall they are both nice for the price.

erniejade

"more depth and digs way deeper" yep 10000% with ya. Suprising at this price point. In a couple of years, this unit will the beyond a bargin on the used market.

nc42acc

First I want to thank erniejade for his time and effort on this post. He is the reason I bit the bullet and bought an XSP-1 gen 2. One hour into having the Emotiva in the system and I can say it is very impressive. If it gets better as it burns in it will best my P5. My system includes the following. MacBook Pro, Line Magnetic LM 502ca DAC, Parasound P5, Parasound A21, Joseph Audio Pulsars, SVS SB13

erniejade

The pulsar is my fave bookshelf type speakers! @ around 200 hours the brightness will tame down on the emo. Like I said before, that emo did not suck. It was quite good actually.

nc42acc

Thanks erniejade. Evening of music listening to the Emo bloom. So far it is much more "holographic" than the p5. My preference leans to the analytical so it is looking like a great match.

F1nut

From the times I've heard them I wouldn't call the Pulsar analytical, but they were hooked up to some high end kits, one being Manley.

nc42acc

F1nut you are correct the Pulsars are very open and neutral. I can hear what erniejade called a slight thinness in the Emotiva. To me I call it more analytical, definitely more resolving in the imaging than the P5.

macromark

Sorry... I know this is an old thread but since it's exactly the question I've been mulling over the past couple weeks, thought I would share a little.

Last week (12/11), I sent an email entitled "Emotiva XSP-1 vs Parasound P5?" to both Parasound and Emotiva sales. Within 15 minutes, I received an email back from Phil Jackson of Parasound... telling me he'd look into it and get back to me later in the day. At the end of the day, I received an email from the company president (Richard Schram) with a bit more info. There was no reply from Emotiva. A few days later (12/14), I emailed Emotiva again and did get a reply this time, but without much information. A couple days and few more emails later, I purchased a Parasound P5 preamp and that arrived on Tuesday of this week.

I had been warned by Phil not to listen too critically until I'd had given the unit some time to break in (about 100 hours). Still, I couldn't wait that long to at least give it a try, so I hooked it all up and slipped on my headphones and cranked the volume up... and up... and up... In fact, I had to max the volume to get a "normal" listening level with my gear (phono cart > preamp > 12 ft interconnects > M-Audio 2496 PC soundcard > Grado SR80s). At that volume, the noise floor was pretty noticeable.

After a couple calls to tech support, I spoke with Tony and he concluded that my cartridge (Dynavector Ruby) just didn't have enough output (0.2mv) to feed the phono stage. Note that the MC gain spec is not published for the P5. Tony suggested it was 53 or 54 db. So... not a good fit. If I didn't care about the cartridge, I'd just get something with higher output and keep going with the P5 since I really do like the unit (and the company). However, the Ruby doesn't have a lot of time logged on it, even though it's more than 30 years old now... I like the way it sounds and it's a good match for my Linn tonearm.

So... The P5 is boxed up with an RA# and waiting for FedEx pick up as I write this and I've put my order in for the XSP-1. The MC gain is published as 60 db so I'm hopeful it will be a better match. Anyway, I'll find out next week and post back (if anyone cares).

SCompRacer

macromark wrote: »

Note that the MC gain spec is not published for the P5. Tony suggested it was 53 or 54 db. So... not a good fit.

An SUT or Step Up Transformer is the answer for low output cartridges with low dB gain stages. I've had some nice tube and SS 60-70dB MC phono stages and prefer using an SUT with lower dB gain stages. You can get more dynamics and a quieter background with a good SUT/MM stage versus using a high output MC stage.

Currently using a reasonably priced Park's Audio Budgie SUT. No affiliation other than being a paying customer. One can also diy...

Polkie2009

Sounds like a heck of a plan SCR! Honestly, you'd probably be happier with the Parasound.

[Deleted User]

I, for one would like to know what you think.
The XSP-1 is a pretty large phono pre. (so I'm not sure what you are after)
I have Aural Harmony-Cryo Gold Alloy Sonnet II XLR's in to the pre
and Signal Copper out. (bought here from Mr. Morrison aka psovlsk)
Much better than the Sonnets interconnecting to the amp. The point is
the cables will matter in your eval.

I use the XSP-1 with the tone controls on, but flat.
Play around a bit before passing final judgement.

Upstatemax

macromark wrote: »

Sorry... I know this is an old thread but since it's exactly the question I've been mulling over the past couple weeks, thought I would share a little.

Last week (12/11), I sent an email entitled "Emotiva XSP-1 vs Parasound P5?" to both Parasound and Emotiva sales. Within 15 minutes, I received an email back from Phil Jackson of Parasound... telling me he'd look into it and get back to me later in the day. At the end of the day, I received an email from the company president (Richard Schram) with a bit more info. There was no reply from Emotiva. A few days later (12/14), I emailed Emotiva again and did get a reply this time, but without much information. A couple days and few more emails later, I purchased a Parasound P5 preamp and that arrived on Tuesday of this week.

I had been warned by Phil not to listen too critically until I'd had given the unit some time to break in (about 100 hours). Still, I couldn't wait that long to at least give it a try, so I hooked it all up and slipped on my headphones and cranked the volume up... and up... and up... In fact, I had to max the volume to get a "normal" listening level with my gear (phono cart > preamp > 12 ft interconnects > M-Audio 2496 PC soundcard > Grado SR80s). At that volume, the noise floor was pretty noticeable.

After a couple calls to tech support, I spoke with Tony and he concluded that my cartridge (Dynavector Ruby) just didn't have enough output (0.2mv) to feed the phono stage. Note that the MC gain spec is not published for the P5. Tony suggested it was 53 or 54 db. So... not a good fit. If I didn't care about the cartridge, I'd just get something with higher output and keep going with the P5 since I really do like the unit (and the company). However, the Ruby doesn't have a lot of time logged on it, even though it's more than 30 years old now... I like the way it sounds and it's a good match for my Linn tonearm.

So... The P5 is boxed up with an RA# and waiting for FedEx pick up as I write this and I've put my order in for the XSP-1. The MC gain is published as 60 db so I'm hopeful it will be a better match. Anyway, I'll find out next week and post back (if anyone cares).

The P5 is one heck of a pre...

You might be better off keeping it and adding the step up that was suggested, or a separate phono pre to your flavor and attaching it to the P5 via one of the many inputs.

You can't beat the value of the P5, especially once you add in the amazing service that Parasound gives out.

[Deleted User]

Maybe @dskip can hook you up with something if you are just looking for a
headphone pre? the ifi phono micro has 66db of gain.

the above recommended $1600.00 of expense opens up huge number of
possibilities...

"In fact, I had to max the volume to get a "normal" listening level with my gear (phono cart > preamp > 12 ft interconnects > M-Audio 2496 PC soundcard > Grado SR80s). "

BlueFox

macromark wrote: »

I had been warned by Phil not to listen too critically until I'd had given the unit some time to break in (about 100 hours). Still, I couldn't wait that long to at least give it a try, so I hooked it all up and slipped on my headphones and cranked the volume up... and After a couple calls to tech support, I spoke with Tony and he concluded that my cartridge (Dynavector Ruby) just didn't have enough output (0.2mv) to feed the phono stage. Note that the MC gain spec is not published for the P5. Tony suggested it was 53 or 54 db. So... not a good fit. If I didn't care about the cartridge, I'd just get something with higher output and keep going with the P5 since I really do like the unit (and the company). However, the Ruby doesn't have a lot of time logged on it, even though it's more than 30 years old now... I like the way it sounds and it's a good match for my Linn tonearm.

Sorry, but that is the silliest reason I have read in a long time for returning a fine piece of gear. Do you really think a 30 year old cartridge can even come close to today's cartridges?

nooshinjohn

BlueFox wrote: »

macromark wrote: »

I had been warned by Phil not to listen too critically until I'd had given the unit some time to break in (about 100 hours). Still, I couldn't wait that long to at least give it a try, so I hooked it all up and slipped on my headphones and cranked the volume up... and After a couple calls to tech support, I spoke with Tony and he concluded that my cartridge (Dynavector Ruby) just didn't have enough output (0.2mv) to feed the phono stage. Note that the MC gain spec is not published for the P5. Tony suggested it was 53 or 54 db. So... not a good fit. If I didn't care about the cartridge, I'd just get something with higher output and keep going with the P5 since I really do like the unit (and the company). However, the Ruby doesn't have a lot of time logged on it, even though it's more than 30 years old now... I like the way it sounds and it's a good match for my Linn tonearm.

Sorry, but that is the silliest reason I have read in a long time for returning a fine piece of gear. Do you really think a 30 year old cartridge can even come close to today's cartridges?

Agreed! My Pass Labs was not really up to snuff for vinyl until I mated it with the Dynavector. It was a huge step up over the Sumiko BPS EvoIII. That cartridge is likely toast just due to age, and is no way responsible for the preamp not doing what you expect. Get a better cartridge and keep the Parasound, but that's just my two cents.

tonyb

Have to agree with the above gents. A 30 year old cartridge....seriously ? No phono pre in the world can overcome that.

Mikey081057

Does the OP think that that cart will sound better with a different pre or phono pre?

nooshinjohn

Mikey081057 wrote: »

Does the OP think that that cart will sound better with a different pre or phono pre?

With either option he would be wrong.

Mikey081057

nbrowser wrote: »

Mikey081057 wrote: »

Does the OP think that that cart will sound better with a different pre or phono pre?

erniejade's the Op...the returner is a classic thread crapper.

I stand corrected as I know Ernie knows better.

nooshinjohn

^^^ditto

[Deleted User]

^^^thretto
Didn't notice the 1 post count.

erniejade

I honestly couldnt say. I use an external phono preamp. I did try out the internal for about 15 minutes ( basically an lp side) and thought it sounded good but then hooked up my jolida d9 was a more to my liking. Phono pre matching can sometimes be tricky especially if you have a low level mc. SCompRacer to me has the right idea especially for a low level mc. Find a pre that you like the sound out of and use a sut.

Although, If your mainly listening via headphones, I would find a good headphone pre that has an aux or a second input and a sut or phono pre and go that route. I think you would have better sound quality with a headphone amp/pre. There's a lot out there from ss or tube. A lot also have built in dac's.

macromark

Wow, not much love here. Sorry to be a "thread crapper"... just took a chance someone might be genuinely interested. FWIW, the Dynavector Karat DV17 is basically the same design as mine but with a slightly smaller diamond cantilever (instead of ruby). The DV17 is still in production.

Yes, I could have kept the P5 and added a step up transformer. Yes, I could also have just tossed out the cart. Just trying to keep my costs down.

F1nut

macromark wrote: »

Just trying to keep my costs down.

Never a good idea at the expense of better sound.

erniejade

macromark, in your first post, you mentioned you plugged in your headphones, are you mainly using headphones? If so please read what I wrote. What I suggesred would even be cheaper ro help keep costs down.

macromark

xcapri79 wrote: »

Welcome to the Polk Audio Forum. Let us know how you like the Emotiva XSP-1.

Thanks! the unit is slated to arrive this coming Monday.

F1nut wrote: »

macromark wrote: »

Just trying to keep my costs down.

Never a good idea at the expense of better sound.

In principal, I agree! In practice, kids and other expenses keep me from going off the rails too far.

erniejade wrote: »

macromark, in your first post, you mentioned you plugged in your headphones, are you mainly using headphones? If so please read what I wrote. What I suggesred would even be cheaper ro help keep costs down.

Thanks for the suggestions. The preamp will live in my tiny office for the time being with the rig I described in my first post. However, I do plan to move most of this down to the living room eventually and for that, I'll transition over to speakers.

transchris

I've had my xsp1 for 1 month and like all my other 7 pieces of emotiva gear,it is exceptional in all regards...it's powered by an xpa2 gen1,and my source is an erc3 gen2..speakers ,,,martin logan sl3's. ..I am more than happy with emotiva...my new xpa5 gen2 just arrived today for my ht...btw...I wouldn't own a preamp without tone controls...that includes emotiva! !!

nooshinjohn

Pass Labs is not for you then, I guess. I would not have a pre WITH them. Luckily, your path on the audio journey will be a short one.