Emotiva Story.

shack

xcapri79 wrote:

Let's put all our hands in place and end this singing Kumbaya.

Why in the hell would we want to do that?

mrbigbluelight

Matt34 wrote: »

Yeah the welcoming committee has been wonderful here.:rolleyes:

As an Associate Jr. Member of the Adjunct Welcoming Committee, may I be the first to extend to you the Hand of Friendship !


....okay, I'm aware that that's really not a hand ...... but, ....... uhm .....

Matt34 wrote: »

You obviously don't know jack about me, yet went out of your way to insult me twice.

Well, I guess that the Hand of Friendship ! thing is starting to look a little better after all, isn't it ?

















..... okay, I'm entertaining myself again because I'm not entirely sure what this thread is about......

Matt34

cfrizz wrote: »

But that is neither here nor there. The fact is around here most people believe their ears & not some meaningless test. You are not going to change your mind & we aren't going to change ours on this particular issue so it's best to agree to disagree.

Here is the best analogy I can think of that relates to this: If we only ever relied on our own perception of things the earth would still be considered flat and the sun would rotate around the earth. That is what humans perceived for thousands of years, yet through science we discovered we were completely wrong.

I use my ears, I just like to verify what I'm hearing from time to time with science.

comfortablycurt

Matt34 wrote: »

Here is the best analogy I can think of that relates to this: If we only ever relied on our own perception of things the earth would still be considered flat and the sun would rotate around the earth. That is what humans perceived for thousands of years, yet through science we discovered we were completely wrong.

I use my ears, I just like to verify what I'm hearing from time to time with science.

Here's a quote by Nelson Pass(snagged from Brock's sig...thanks Brock:))

"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass

There's a lot of truth in that. You can read all the specs you want, but that still isn't going to tell you very much about how something sounds. It gives you a certain amount of insight as to what you should expect it to sound like, but the numbers can only say so much. There are amps that sound incredible in some peoples rigs, and utterly terrible in others. Does that make it a **** amp? Not at all...the synergy just wasn't on in the second rig like it was in the first.

The specs are still the same no matter what rig you use it in...but the sound could be a night and day difference.



edit-Only 12 more posts to 700!!! The Emotiva Story Lives on!!!

F1nut

"Sorry, I was a little light-headed when I posted that from all the pixie dust and snake oil present on another forum I was visiting."

Anyone else notice that Matt hasn't denied his comment was directed at CP? More of a side step.

The dance continues.

Ricardo

xcapri79 wrote: »

Emotiva is operating on a similar model from my observations. If they stick to it, I see great success for them.

Wrong. WRONG!.

Here's an example of a good business model, from which everyone should learn!

Sara Lee is examining a sale of its European household and personal-care business as the company seeks to reverse a decline in its stock and focus on its core food and beverage business, the Wall Street Journal reports, citing people familiar with the matter.

The right Business Model: Focus on PIE!!!

suprafantx

xcapri79 wrote: »

Is this thread still about Emo?

No, it is about food. CAKE, PIE, and SH$T.:p:p:p

shack

suprafantx wrote:

No, it is about food. CAKE, PIE, and SH$T.

Oh no...it IS about that...AND EMO...and so much more. It is a WORLD CLASS THREAD!

metal83

You guys are a riot! lol ;)

vmaxer

What if all of us earthlings (and others) agreed 100% on everything...liked the same things and weren't different....:eek:

Would the world be a better place or just BORING??

NotaSuv

Fred has over 30 years experince as a sound engineer...tried these on a whim...first one he turned on blew out......




John, Since you were there---

A copy of an e-mail I just sent -- enjoy

Fred

---

Dear Dan and Lonnie,

Thanks for the opportunity to try out the XPA-1's. I am in the process of packing all four of them for return. It appears I have the wrong speakers for the amplifiers. Further to our telcons, I have some notes and comments that you may find of value.

As I explained to Dan, who generously offered me good pricing as a return customer, I have been attempting to replace a high-power, high damping factor (over 10000) amplifier that I was driving two parallel Woofers with each of the L and R channels. It has been shipped to Japan and I now realize it was a mistake to have sold it. I was using bridged XPA-2's to drive the HF horns. The speakers weigh 300lbs each not including the separate crossover enclosure.

http://homepage.mac.com/dkoya/audio/k2m9500.html

After reading your XPA-1 description with reference to its superior control and limitless power and comments that it would "laugh at a 2ohm load", I believed that two xpa-1s should easily replace the single Crown Reference 1 that I sold to acquire the XPA-1's. When I unpacked and connected the XPA-1s to the woofer pairs, I was greatly dissappointed that the was intolerably loose, muddy and boomy. I couldn't raise the volume because energy remaining in the circuit was too highly annoying. The motion of the heavy woofers just wouldn't stop quickly and crisply. So I ordered two more, 1 for each woofer and was tri-amping, and beefed up the speaker leads to 4 conductors of 12awg from each amp. The result was an improvement but still far short of the control I experienced with the amp I was replacing. Although only 3 of four were operational, I concluded that four XPA1s still couldn't do it. There was an improvement in the midrange and imaging, but not enough to be convincing. It was obvious that an XPA-1 is definitely not the "control freak" as described in one of the publications.

I then tried other amplifiers. An $800 used Proceed HPA-2 stereo amp made by Levinson with a channel to each woofer sounded better than an HPA-1 on each woofer, but was still lacking in damping factor... Next, A pair of 20-year old Adcom GFA-565 monoblocks were tried because of their high damping factor of 800. The bass was noticibly tighter, almost as good as my original amp, but unfortunately they were rough and muddied the midrange.

Having proven that higher damping factor was key, I remembered that Lonnie once stated told me that damping factor for the XPA-2s was 500, not 200 as stated in the manuals. I then connected an XPA-2 with a channel each to a woofer. The bass tightness improved to a point somewhere between the XPA1's and the Adcoms as might be predicted according to damping factor. Of interest is that some re-equalizing was needed as seen on the spectrum analyzer before they sounded good. A further note is that extensive acoustic work has been done with the approximately 3500 cubic foot room with favorable hgt, width length ratios. so the room should not be considered an issue.

My latest information is that the XPA1-s have an internal resistance of 0.04 ohms with an 8 ohm load that translates to a damping factor of 200. When asked, Lonnie wasn't sure of this, which I found surprising. One of your web pages states the THD of the XPA-1 as 0.001 at full power from 20-20,000. The manual and bench tests implied a much different number. I concluded that is that it is not a good sign if the primary representaives of the company are not sure of either the published or other critical specifications. I had been rationalizing that this information might have been kept unavailable for competitive reasons.

Some quality control issues:

1-A rubber foot came off one unit when sliding it sideways on a shelf. Apply glue?
2-A trigger output failed to activate the next amplifier. Their sequence had to be rearranged. Add series resistor to prevent damage from shorting, in the event someone is reaching behind the unit to feel the opening with the tip of the connector?
3-One of the amplifiers smoked from its rear center when the amplifier was first switched on. Lonnie thought it was from the regulator board. Power on test?
4-A leftmost blue level indicator lamp on one of the three working units stayed on after the others were triggered off. It was erratic because it sometimes did stay off. I thought I noticed it once on one of the other amps. Perhaps it is set too sensitive and noise induction from the speaker wiring activated it.
5-The power cords were 18 gauge as might be found for desk lamps and clock radios. The plastic jackets were so brittle at low temperature that you might need to caution users not to flex them until they get to room temperature. When I saw this, I immediately re-wired for 240vac, as the Proceed amplifier with a similar kva rating had a 14 gauge cord.
6-The power connectors at the rear of the amplifers easily comes loose when the amplifier is shifted. Add a strain-relief outboard fastner that would hold the cord to the chassis? Permanently wire the cord inside, with a strain relief and grommet through the chassis?

There are some qualities that I applaud, such as the automatic ac voltage switching, optical isolation for the trigger inputs and the addition of the trigger outputs for repeating.

I know there are quality control issures with a new product, especially when manufacturing overseas. I appreciate the opportunity to acquire a quality product at an affordable price, as has been my experience so far. Might it be possible to sacrifice some phase alignment and other parameters and do some circuit tweaking to produce a separate model with high negative feedback? A damping factor upwards of say 600 or so, maybe 1000, to drive difficult loads and add some "woofer authority"?

At least you don't have as tough a job as Obama!

Thanks and Regards,

Fred K

Ricardo

Mas le

heiney9

NotaSuv wrote: »

Fred has over 30 years experince as a sound engineer...tried these on a whim...first one he turned on blew out......




John, Since you were there---

A copy of an e-mail I just sent -- enjoy

Fred

---

Dear Dan and Lonnie,

Thanks for the opportunity to try out the XPA-1's. I am in the process of packing all four of them for return. It appears I have the wrong speakers for the amplifiers. Further to our telcons, I have some notes and comments that you may find of value.

As I explained to Dan, who generously offered me good pricing as a return customer, I have been attempting to replace a high-power, high damping factor (over 10000) amplifier that I was driving two parallel Woofers with each of the L and R channels. It has been shipped to Japan and I now realize it was a mistake to have sold it. I was using bridged XPA-2's to drive the HF horns. The speakers weigh 300lbs each not including the separate crossover enclosure.

http://homepage.mac.com/dkoya/audio/k2m9500.html

After reading your XPA-1 description with reference to its superior control and limitless power and comments that it would "laugh at a 2ohm load", I believed that two xpa-1s should easily replace the single Crown Reference 1 that I sold to acquire the XPA-1's. When I unpacked and connected the XPA-1s to the woofer pairs, I was greatly dissappointed that the was intolerably loose, muddy and boomy. I couldn't raise the volume because energy remaining in the circuit was too highly annoying. The motion of the heavy woofers just wouldn't stop quickly and crisply. So I ordered two more, 1 for each woofer and was tri-amping, and beefed up the speaker leads to 4 conductors of 12awg from each amp. The result was an improvement but still far short of the control I experienced with the amp I was replacing. Although only 3 of four were operational, I concluded that four XPA1s still couldn't do it. There was an improvement in the midrange and imaging, but not enough to be convincing. It was obvious that an XPA-1 is definitely not the "control freak" as described in one of the publications.

I then tried other amplifiers. An $800 used Proceed HPA-2 stereo amp made by Levinson with a channel to each woofer sounded better than an HPA-1 on each woofer, but was still lacking in damping factor... Next, A pair of 20-year old Adcom GFA-565 monoblocks were tried because of their high damping factor of 800. The bass was noticibly tighter, almost as good as my original amp, but unfortunately they were rough and muddied the midrange.

Having proven that higher damping factor was key, I remembered that Lonnie once stated told me that damping factor for the XPA-2s was 500, not 200 as stated in the manuals. I then connected an XPA-2 with a channel each to a woofer. The bass tightness improved to a point somewhere between the XPA1's and the Adcoms as might be predicted according to damping factor. Of interest is that some re-equalizing was needed as seen on the spectrum analyzer before they sounded good. A further note is that extensive acoustic work has been done with the approximately 3500 cubic foot room with favorable hgt, width length ratios. so the room should not be considered an issue.

My latest information is that the XPA1-s have an internal resistance of 0.04 ohms with an 8 ohm load that translates to a damping factor of 200. When asked, Lonnie wasn't sure of this, which I found surprising. One of your web pages states the THD of the XPA-1 as 0.001 at full power from 20-20,000. The manual and bench tests implied a much different number. I concluded that is that it is not a good sign if the primary representaives of the company are not sure of either the published or other critical specifications. I had been rationalizing that this information might have been kept unavailable for competitive reasons.

Some quality control issues:

1-A rubber foot came off one unit when sliding it sideways on a shelf. Apply glue?
2-A trigger output failed to activate the next amplifier. Their sequence had to be rearranged. Add series resistor to prevent damage from shorting, in the event someone is reaching behind the unit to feel the opening with the tip of the connector?
3-One of the amplifiers smoked from its rear center when the amplifier was first switched on. Lonnie thought it was from the regulator board. Power on test?
4-A leftmost blue level indicator lamp on one of the three working units stayed on after the others were triggered off. It was erratic because it sometimes did stay off. I thought I noticed it once on one of the other amps. Perhaps it is set too sensitive and noise induction from the speaker wiring activated it.
5-The power cords were 18 gauge as might be found for desk lamps and clock radios. The plastic jackets were so brittle at low temperature that you might need to caution users not to flex them until they get to room temperature. When I saw this, I immediately re-wired for 240vac, as the Proceed amplifier with a similar kva rating had a 14 gauge cord.
6-The power connectors at the rear of the amplifers easily comes loose when the amplifier is shifted. Add a strain-relief outboard fastner that would hold the cord to the chassis? Permanently wire the cord inside, with a strain relief and grommet through the chassis?

There are some qualities that I applaud, such as the automatic ac voltage switching, optical isolation for the trigger inputs and the addition of the trigger outputs for repeating.

I know there are quality control issures with a new product, especially when manufacturing overseas. I appreciate the opportunity to acquire a quality product at an affordable price, as has been my experience so far. Might it be possible to sacrifice some phase alignment and other parameters and do some circuit tweaking to produce a separate model with high negative feedback? A damping factor upwards of say 600 or so, maybe 1000, to drive difficult loads and add some "woofer authority"?

At least you don't have as tough a job as Obama!

Thanks and Regards,

Fred K

Yeppers.

H9

mrbigbluelight

Well, that's all fine and dandy but

mrbigbluelight

the important thing is

heiney9

We made it to 700!!!!!

mrbigbluelight

Another milestone in Club Polk history:

mrbigbluelight

Note to Self: Next time have bee-cat pictures ready.

metal83

I'm about to hit a milestone in my own personal Club Polk history, with 1,000 posts!


I wonder if i'll get a cookie (or maybe a "PIE")...:D

heiney9

mrbigbluelight wrote: »

Note to Self: Next time have bee-cat pictures ready.

Sorry Blue, didn't realize you had something ready to go

Ricardo

705. The sky is the limit.

cfrizz

And may this thread live on! LOL. What fun.

By the way, my favorite cheesecake is Ricotta, and nobody makes it like an Italian restaurant somewhere in VA. I'll have to ask Mark the name of it.

Kex

Ricardo wrote: »

Mas le

Ricardo

Kex wrote: »

Is that more oil on the fire or something? Sorry, but I don't have any culture .

Translation is "more wood for the fire"; it's a common idiom in Spanish that means just that. A bump if you will

vmaxer

:d

timlitton

Lo siento Ricardo, no hablo espa

Ricardo

It does sound a bit retarded.

Lo siento Ricardo, no hablo espa

Kex

Matt34 wrote: »

That's your opinion, just don't go throwing it around as fact because objectively in controlled environments it can be proven wrong time and time again. ...

Matt34 wrote: »

I'm not saying your or others are not "perceiving" a difference. Auditioning is fun, but it has been shown time and time again that sighted listening tests are biased by a variety of factors. I suggest reading the following literature to illustrate the exact effects of bias in a sighted listening test.

Toole, Floyd E. Subjective Evaluation: Identifying and Controlling the Variables. J. Audio Engineering Soc., Conference Paper 8-013. May 1990.

Toole, Floyd E.; Olive, Sean E. Hearing is Believing vs. Believing is Hearing: Blind vs. Sighted Listening Tests, and Other Interesting Things. J. Audio Engineering Soc., Conference Paper 3894. November 1994.

Kex wrote: »

Oh no ... here we go ... the thread may soon be going back down the tubes ... together with Messrs. Toole, Floyd and Olive.

cfrizz wrote: »

Tsk, tsk, tsk. You all are one mean bunch!...

I am sorry if it was I that offended you, Matt34, but I was somewhat irked by the elitist and dismissive tone you seemed to be taking with poster cnh.

I was having some sincere regrets about what might have been perceived as my harsh tone, especially when I noticed you seem to know both the revered cfrizz and Rt. Hon. Ron Temple (who are both far more "senior" to me here, since I am really mostly still but a lowly newbie) but then you went and ruined my contrite mood with this post:

Matt34 wrote: »

No dancing here numb nuts...I guess I've now been properly introduced to the resident ****. It's ok, every forum has one.

I do hope you were merely in jest, and attempting to stick with the oft humorous tone of the thread, but sadly, by now you are most probably on F1nut's bozo list, which is not a good place to be, and which, I hasten to add, I am not (or at the very least, was not, when I won his most excellent karma recently). Oh well. Perhaps my initial response was justified after all ... ?

P.S. this really IS the most AMAZING thread, and I thought I was joking when I suggested it was headed for big one triple o!

Matt34

Kex wrote: »

I am sorry if it was I that offended you, Matt34, but I was somewhat irked by the elitist and dismissive tone you seemed to be taking with poster cnh.

I was having some sincere regrets about what might have been perceived as my harsh tone, especially when I noticed you seem to know both the revered cfrizz and Rt. Hon. Ron Temple (who are both far more "senior" to me here, since I am really mostly still but a lowly newbie) but then you went and ruined my contrite mood with this post:


I do hope you were merely in jest, and attempting to stick with the oft humorous tone of the thread, but sadly, by now you are most probably on F1nut's bozo list, which is not a good place to be, and which, I hasten to add, I am not (or at the very least, was not, when I won his most excellent karma recently). Oh well. Perhaps my initial response was justified after all ... ?

P.S. this really IS the most AMAZING thread, and I thought I was joking when I suggested it was headed for big one triple o!

My mistake was interjecting another point of view which appears is not acceptable here. It was not my intention to come across as "elitist or dismissive", it's hard to potray tone with written text. Howeve, I now realize that it's not welcome and I'm gladly going to move on and away.

My response to F1nut stands and I hope my request to the admins to remove my account is followed through.

zombie boy 2000

I have oft wondered which would prove victorious in a battle to the death - the valiant sea otter or the kingly lemur.