Overkill or NOT......i have a RXV1800 and want an Emotiva XPA-5

[b00st]

I have polk inwalls that that handle 100 watts.

My yamaha receiver supposedly does 130/channel.

my home setup currently is now down to 5.1 instead of 7.1.
i was thinking about getting an XPA-5...well cuz i want one.
my yamaha 1800 currently drives all my speakers. i have no
idea what it actually drives 5 speakers at if it says its drives
7 with 130. i've been wanting to get an emotiva XPA-5 and
have that drive my 5 speakers and when i go back to 7.1
i will will have my receiver drive the rear 2. and maybe over
time get the emotiva XPA-2 then to power the rears if i feel
its falling short.

question is...if i put this emotiva XPA-5 to my polk inwalls...
is it too much for the speakers? will i notice a difference
in my sound if i go from my yamaha to the emotiva?

[Drew664]

You might hear a difference going from an AVR to separates, however there are people on this forum who have A/B tested Emotiva amplifiers from the UPA/XPA lines and they couldn't hear a difference.

You might be able to save some cash by buying the UPA-7, which by the way is on sale right now, $629.

[ZIPPO]

Originally Posted by b00st

I have polk inwalls that that handle 100 watts.

My yamaha receiver supposedly does 130/channel.

my home setup currently is now down to 5.1 instead of 7.1.
i was thinking about getting an XPA-5...well cuz i want one.
my yamaha 1800 currently drives all my speakers. i have no
idea what it actually drives 5 speakers at if it says its drives
7 with 130.

Test Bench: Yamaha RX-V1800 A/V Receiver
By Daniel Kumin
December 2007
Yamaha's RX-V1800 yielded the fine technical performance usual from the firm's A/V receivers. Power exceeded its specs by a good margin and bettered 100 watts all around, even with 5 channels driven. The unit's power supply appeared to run out of current when 2 more channels were added, however, since the 7-channel result dropped by nearly 3 dB, to 55 watts—a non-issue in the real world., where program signals never demand this level of stability. Yamaha equips its receiver with a software setup switch for speakers of 6-ohms or lower, which effectively limits power to about two thirds.

Frequency response, distortion, and D/A linearity were uniformly excellent, and crossover responses were all bang on the numbers, with nicely accurate slopes—not always the case. PCM and Dolby Digital noise were very good, if a dB or 2 shy of the best we've seen, although S/N on the analog-multichannel inputs was truly superior. I note that the analog input was a good bit more sensitive than the digital ones (re: our reference levels of -20 dBFS or 200 mV for 1 watt output), so listeners who switch from the latter to the former without adjusting the volume could be in for a roughly 10 dB surprise. While this sounds like a lot, most characterize it as only about subjectively "twice as loud" or so.

DOLBY DIGITAL PERFORMANCE

All data were obtained from various test DVDs using 16-bit dithered test signals, which set limits on measured distorting and noise performance. Reference input level is –20 dBFS, and reference output is 1 watt into 8 ohms. Volume setting for reference level was -6. All level trims at zero, except for subwoofer-related tests, all speakers were set to "large," subwoofer on. All are worst-case figures where applicable.

Output at clipping (1 kHz into 8/4 ohms)
1 channel driven: 158/281 W (22/24.5 dBW)*
5 channels driven (8 ohms): 103 W (20.1 dBW)
7 channels driven (8 ohms): 55 W (17.4 dBW)
Distortion at 1 watt (THD+N, 1 kHz)
8/4 ohms: 0.02/0.03%
Noise level (A-wtd): –73.4 dB
Excess noise (with sine tone)
16-bit (EN16): 0.9 dB
Frequency response: 20 Hz to 20 kHz +0, –0.2 dB

MULTICHANNEL PERFORMANCE, ANALOG INPUT

Reference input and output level is 200 mV; volume setting for reference output level was -14.
Distortion (THD+N, 1 kHz, 8 ohms): 0.008%
Noise level (A-wtd.): –90.1
Frequency response: <10 Hz to 166 kHz +0, –3 dB

STEREO PERFORMANCE, DIGITAL INPUT

Reference level is –20 dBFS; all level trims at zero. Volume setting for reference level was -3.

Output at clipping (1 kHz, 8/4 ohms, both channels driven): 150/237 W (21.8/23.7 dBW)*
Distortion at reference level: 0.02%
Linearity error (at –90 dBFS): 0.2 dB
Noise level (A-wtd): –74.8 dB
with 96-kHz/24-bit signals: –85.4 dB
Excess noise (with/without sine tone)
16-bit (EN16): 0.6/0.8 dB
quasi-20-bit (EN20): 13.3/12.1 dB
Noise modulation: 0.6 dB
Frequency response: <10 Hz to 20 kHz +0, –0.3 dB
with 96-kHz/24-bit signals: <10 Hz to 44 kHz +0, –3 dB

*With receiver's software setup switch at 8 ohms. With switch at 6 ohms, power was limited to about 90 and 160 watts (19.5/22 dBW) into 8 ohms and 4 ohms respectively.

BASS-MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE

Measured results obtained with Dolby Digital test signals.
Subwoofer-output frequency response (crossover set to 80 Hz): 24 dB/octave (approx.) above –6-dB rolloff point of 80 Hz
High-pass-filter frequency response (crossover set to 80 Hz): 12 dB/octave below –3-dB rolloff point of 80 Hz
Maximum unclipped subwoofer output (trim at 0): 6.8v
Subwoofer distortion (from 6-channel, 30-Hz, 0-dBFS signal; subwoofer trim set to 0): 0.3%
Crossover consistency: bass crossover frequency and slope were consistent for all sources and formats
Signal-format consistency: consistent for all applicable formats
Speaker size selection: all channels can be set to "small"
Speaker-distance compensation: available for all main channels.

Full Review
Test Reports RSS Feed
More Test Reports
Back to Homepage
What's New on S&V

[b00st]

Thanks for the data on 1800. Seems like a decent performer @ 5 channels. Could use some help on 7 though. So an upa-7 cranks out 135x7. I probably won't see much improvememt over the 1800 @ 5 channels driven. Unless I went with the XPA-5 and upped to true 200x5.

I plan on using paradigm studios or a high-end in-wall. I haven't decided yet. The room will decide.

So the emotiva xpa-5 might be overkill for my little Polk in-walls. I don't want to blow the speakers by over driving them on some intense scene. Maybe I'll look toward a subwoofer. Not sure what to do.

[red_5ive]

Figured I'd chime in since I was in a similar boat. I had an RX-V1800 that I used with Boston Acoustic in-walls. I added an Emotiva LPA-1 (predecessor of the UPA-7), and the Boston in-walls opened up BIG TIME. I don't really crank the volume too high, but the overall improvement in audio quality was, I hate to say it, night & day and at pretty much any volume level. If you don't really crank the volume to ear bleed levels, I agree with with what was suggested previously and get the UPA-7. You're pretty much guaranteed 125W into 8ohm ALL channels driven. But, I also don't think the XPA-5 is overkill if you look at it as a future-proof investment should you upgrade to more power hungry speakers down the line. The upgrade bug just never seems to stop biting.

[b00st]

Originally Posted by red_5ive

Figured I'd chime in since I was in a similar boat. I had an RX-V1800 that I used with Boston Acoustic in-walls. I added an Emotiva LPA-1 (predecessor of the UPA-7), and the Boston in-walls opened up BIG TIME. I don't really crank the volume too high, but the overall improvement in audio quality was, I hate to say it, night & day and at pretty much any volume level. If you don't really crank the volume to ear bleed levels, I agree with with what was suggested previously and get the UPA-7. You're pretty much guaranteed 125W into 8ohm ALL channels driven. But, I also don't think the XPA-5 is overkill if you look at it as a future-proof investment should you upgrade to more power hungry speakers down the line. The upgrade bug just never seems to stop biting.

this was an investment now.......for my future speaker upgrade. but if i couldn't take advantage of it now...then i might as well wait and spend the 800 odd dollars on something else that i could improve upon.

the next set of speakers will be paradigm studio 100s/cc690/adp590s. so definitely more power hungry than current in-walls. or i may just go will some solid in-walls. it was a toss up between the upa-7 and xpa-5...i decided on the xpa-5 since i figure the future speakers will definitely be power hungry.

though the upa-7 is only 629 currently...very attractive price. i just don't want to fall short when i purchase the next set of speakers.

but u did notice a big improvement from rxv1800 to the upa-7? are u driving 7 speakers or 5 speakers? 5 channels driven of yamaha power is @ 100+ and the UPA is only a few more watts. i wouldn't think people would notice a difference here. i would definitely think at 7 channels driven there would be a noteable difference between the 2.

[Beta Man]

There are certainly some really good in-walls available too..... (at a higher price) I think you'd get more bang for your buck upgrading those first.

[Hammie]

Not!!!

[b00st]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

There are certainly some really good in-walls available too..... (at a higher price) I think you'd get more bang for your buck upgrading those first.

beta,
i actually downgraded my setup...i went with in-walls to clean up the look of the basement. so i didn't go all out on the speakers i just put in because i am gearing up to the sell the house. if i wasn't going to sell...then i would have dropped some serious coin on the speakers. my little one loves to climb on my stuff and push it over...so in-wall was a better option of now. and i planned on leaving the speakers with the house...so i wasn't going to give someone a great set of speakers. these polks just do the job no more...no less...but i've been bit upgrade bug. and i need more

[red_5ive]

Originally Posted by b00st

this was an investment now.......for my future speaker upgrade. but if i couldn't take advantage of it now...then i might as well wait and spend the 800 odd dollars on something else that i could improve upon.

the next set of speakers will be paradigm studio 100s/cc690/adp590s. so definitely more power hungry than current in-walls. or i may just go will some solid in-walls. it was a toss up between the upa-7 and xpa-5...i decided on the xpa-5 since i figure the future speakers will definitely be power hungry.

though the upa-7 is only 629 currently...very attractive price. i just don't want to fall short when i purchase the next set of speakers.

but u did notice a big improvement from rxv1800 to the upa-7? are u driving 7 speakers or 5 speakers? 5 channels driven of yamaha power is @ 100+ and the UPA is only a few more watts. i wouldn't think people would notice a difference here. i would definitely think at 7 channels driven there would be a noteable difference between the 2.

I wouldn't just be looking at this in terms of power. The most demanding section of an AVR are the amps, however the amps are sharing the same power supply as the pre-pro section and all the bells and whistles it comes with. Adding a separate amp should clean up the overall sound quality, even one that is rated at 125W p/ch (all channels driven). That has been my experience with external amps over the years (not just Emotiva). I know that people here probably think of me as another Emotiva fanboy (and I can give a rat's a$$), but over the years I've owned separates from B&K, Carver, Adcom, Nakamichi, Yamaha, and have tried other gear from ATi, Parasound, and Rotel for extended periods. In my experience there's no question over the added value in terms of sound quality that a separate amp can introduce. It's not just about the numbers.

I should note, however, that I only used in-walls for surrounds in a 5.1 setup. The LPA-1 completely opened them up, but I can't really comment on a full in-wall setup all around. I would expect an external amp should still help regardless if it's 125W or 200W, but truthfully I feel that YMMV.

[b00st]

Originally Posted by red_5ive

I wouldn't just be looking at this in terms of power. The most demanding section of an AVR are the amps, however the amps are sharing the same power supply as the pre-pro section and all the bells and whistles it comes with. Adding a separate amp should clean up the overall sound quality, even one that is rated at 125W p/ch (all channels driven). That has been my experience with external amps over the years (not just Emotiva). I know that people here probably think of me as another Emotiva fanboy (and I can give a rat's a$$), but over the years I've owned separates from B&K, Carver, Adcom, Nakamichi, Yamaha, and have tried other gear from ATi, Parasound, and Rotel for extended periods. In my experience there's no question over the added value in terms of sound quality that a separate amp can introduce. It's not just about the numbers.

I should note, however, that I only used in-walls for surrounds in a 5.1 setup. The LPA-1 completely opened them up, but I can't really comment on a full in-wall setup all around. I would expect an external amp should still help regardless if it's 125W or 200W, but truthfully I feel that YMMV.

thanks your input is much appreciated. i've just really started to get into home theater. and i have no experiece with external amps. emotiva makes a great product for the price...may even be unbeatable at that price point. the rotel i was looking at was $2000 for something similar to the XPA-5. i fully understand the quality of rotel. i especially appreciate the add insight...since u have the same receiver. i think an XPA-5 now and then when i got back to 7.1 i will get an XPA-2 to power the rears.

i think i will go ahead with this purchase of the XPA-5. as right now i have no use for UPA-7. i'm ok with buying an XPA-2 down the road when that time comes....which comes with a 2.35 screen SIM2 projector...and most likely paradigm...but i still may go in-wall. there is a high end store by my office that has shown me some great in-wall speakers. And most likely they will build the theater room. THE EDGE...from what i seen they do great work.

[red_5ive]

Originally Posted by b00st

thanks your input is much appreciated. i've just really started to get into home theater. and i have no experiece with external amps. emotiva makes a great product for the price...may even be unbeatable at that price point. the rotel i was looking at was $2000 for something similar to the XPA-5. i fully understand the quality of rotel. i especially appreciate the add insight...since u have the same receiver. i think an XPA-5 now and then when i got back to 7.1 i will get an XPA-2 to power the rears.

i think i will go ahead with this purchase of the XPA-5. as right now i have no use for UPA-7. i'm ok with buying an XPA-2 down the road when that time comes....which comes with a 2.35 screen SIM2 projector...and most likely paradigm...but i still may go in-wall. there is a high end store by my office that has shown me some great in-wall speakers. And most likely they will build the theater room. THE EDGE...from what i seen they do great work.

If you stick with in-walls I think you'll be fine with just the XPA-5 since you won't be going full range, and then power the remaining 2 channels with the 1800. If you do add an XPA-2 (especially if you get the Paradigm) you'll want to set it up to power your fronts. Cool, sounds like you'll have a nice HT room when you have it built (and you already have a nice clean setup, btw!). I'm jealous!

[b00st]

Originally Posted by red_5ive

If you stick with in-walls I think you'll be fine with just the XPA-5 since you won't be going full range, and then power the remaining 2 channels with the 1800. If you do add an XPA-2 (especially if you get the Paradigm) you'll want to set it up to power your fronts. Cool, sounds like you'll have a nice HT room when you have it built (and you already have a nice clean setup, btw!). I'm jealous!

thanks red!

my setup is a minimalist setup....i went for clean lines and open area. just a good flow in the room....so its not much to look at...but i like that.

so in front with the plasma...there isn't much to see. but it sounds decent enough and looks nice. i'm really starting to enjoy my home theater. and now i want to further it. first it was cars...now its home theater. all are expensive hobbies.

it is I that is jealous! i wish i had some speakers like that in my house!