More on the Emotiva LPA-1.......

[thedude65]

I'm interested in getting the LPA-1 or maybe waiting for the so-called follow-up amp (125 x 7).While on the Emotiva website,I downloaded the LPA-1 manual to take a closer look.Did anyone know that the LPA-1 is rated at 125 x 5, 50 x 2 into 8 ohms, all channels driven from 1KHZ, NOT 20HZ like most other amps! Is this why it only costs $499? What would it be rated per channel at 20hz? 90 watts per? This reminds me of the watts per cammoflage you ussually see with low-cost a/v receivers. Like Ralph Kramden said, "i knew there had to be a by the way in there somewhere!! Any thoughts out there in audio land? hmmm?

[Mr Peabody]

You might take a look at the prior two posts that were started on this amp. It seems those who have bought it are happy with the power and believe it is actually under rated. Why they would use 1k is beyond me. Maybe it was a misprint. You could email Emotiva and ask. I was skeptical too but Kex had his side by side with an Adcom and Rotel and he felt the Emotiva had the edge.

[kexodusc]

I noticed it right away. I just didn't care. Yes, you'll see the 1 KHz benchmark used in a lot of receivers under $2k at best buy and other stores these days, but that's usually accompanied with several other shortcuts to achieve a high number. Generally the 20-20KHz test shows 10-20 watts less/channel. Sometimes not even that. You can discount the power rating by 10 watts/channel if that matters to you. But then you're fussing over semantics and not real world performance - the difference in between a 110 and 125 watt amp is going to be moot for all intents and purposes. That's what? 0.25 dB louder before distortion creeps in? And if that extra 15 watts mattered to you, I would suggest you should be looking at a much beefier amp in the 200 watt range anyway

One might think Emotiva was playing the numbers game to achieve a better "rating" to fool people, but I doubt that's the case. They cater to the internet crowd only, who are more likely to do their homework, ask questions, etc.

And let's think about this for a minute.

This particular spec was taken with all 7 channels driven, which is an absolutely unrealistic, excessively difficult load for any amplifier to do a power test under. All channels driven loads don't exist in music or movies for the duration required to meet the testing criteria. That made the 1KHz thing completely irrelevant. If it can do 125 watts all channels driven, it'll easily do 125 watts into 20Hz-20KHz in 2 channels and probably significantly more. Companies that take shortcuts to boost ratings don't do the all channels driven test, for sure.

If it was the 2-channel spec, or instantaneous peak power spec with 1% distortion or the likes, I'd have been very leary.

I never asked, but my guess is they 20Hz-20KHz test would show a weird number like 113 watts or 108 watts or something. The 125 was a nice round figure for advertising purposes.

As Mr. Peabody said - I have Adcom and Rotel amps in the 80-100 watt range and this thing is far more powerful, and IMHO a bit better sounding. Especially at louder levels. That's all the marks of more clean power.

It's not going to win a face-off with PS Audio and Bryston gear by any means, but it's well beyond mid-fi receiver performance. Rich and I both own mid-level, $1000+ yamaha receiver units that boast 120 watt/channel specs at 20Hz-20KHz. The LPA-1 is far more powerful.

Sometimes we have to understand the specs instead of just relying on numbers to judge equipment. There's better sounding amps that are far less powerful too - no spec will capture that.

[frenchmon]

I noticed it right away. I just didn't care. Yes, you'll see the 1 KHz benchmark used in a lot of receivers under $2k at best buy and other stores these days, but that's usually accompanied with several other shortcuts to achieve a high number. Generally the 20-20KHz test shows 10-20 watts less/channel. Sometimes not even that. You can discount the power rating by 10 watts/channel if that matters to you. But then you're fussing over semantics and not real world performance - the difference in between a 110 and 125 watt amp is going to be moot for all intents and purposes. That's what? 0.25 dB louder before distortion creeps in? And if that extra 15 watts mattered to you, I would suggest you should be looking at a much beefier amp in the 200 watt range anyway

One might think Emotiva was playing the numbers game to achieve a better "rating" to fool people, but I doubt that's the case. They cater to the internet crowd only, who are more likely to do their homework, ask questions, etc.

And let's think about this for a minute.

This particular spec was taken with all 7 channels driven, which is an absolutely unrealistic, excessively difficult load for any amplifier to do a power test under. All channels driven loads don't exist in music or movies for the duration required to meet the testing criteria. That made the 1KHz thing completely irrelevant. If it can do 125 watts all channels driven, it'll easily do 125 watts into 20Hz-20KHz in 2 channels and probably significantly more. Companies that take shortcuts to boost ratings don't do the all channels driven test, for sure.

If it was the 2-channel spec, or instantaneous peak power spec with 1% distortion or the likes, I'd have been very leary.

I never asked, but my guess is they 20Hz-20KHz test would show a weird number like 113 watts or 108 watts or something. The 125 was a nice round figure for advertising purposes.

As Mr. Peabody said - I have Adcom and Rotel amps in the 80-100 watt range and this thing is far more powerful, and IMHO a bit better sounding. Especially at louder levels. That's all the marks of more clean power.

It's not going to win a face-off with PS Audio and Bryston gear by any means, but it's well beyond mid-fi receiver performance. Rich and I both own mid-level, $1000+ yamaha receiver units that boast 120 watt/channel specs at 20Hz-20KHz. The LPA-1 is far more powerful.

Sometimes we have to understand the specs instead of just relying on numbers to judge equipment. There's better sounding amps that are far less powerful too - no spec will capture that.

If I may, can I kindly ask of you....if you have Emotiva as a power amp to a reciever...did the Emotiva change the sound of the reciever or did it just add more robust to the original sound of the reciever.

frenchmon

[kexodusc]

If I may, can I kindly ask of you....if you have Emotiva as a power amp to a reciever...did the Emotiva change the sound of the reciever or did it just add more robust to the original sound of the reciever.

frenchmon

Fair question, I've been asked that a few times before. It definitely sounds "smoother" at all volumes, and much easier on the ears at louder levels. I hate using "smoother" to describe sound, but that's the best word I can come up with. I'd say it changed the sound a bit to the warm side, bass is much more defined, and imaging and soundstage are noticeably improved. A fair upgrade all around, so yes, it changed the sound. The receiver didn't sound bad, but just not as good.

I've used several power amps with my receivers, each has added its own "flavor" to the sound. I think a power amp would have to sound exactly the same as the receiver's amp not to. Odds of that are slim.

Generally, I've found receivers tend to skimp on the amp side of things. I was using modest, 60 watt/channel Adcom amps from over a decade ago instead of my receiver's built in 120 watt/channel amps, and they were a noticeable upgrade too. My receiver has been bench tested by a few magazines and truly hit the 120 watt mark, but loudness/power doesn't always speak to sound quality, and I think the current capability of some slightly lower powered amps might be higher than most receivers. The Adcoms are probably modestly rated too. I think though that In modest size rooms with your typical entry levelish speakers, the benefits of adding quality external amplification is probably not as noticeable.

As you can probably tell, I've been an advocate of adding external amps to receivers for a long time now as a cost effective upgrade.

[bobsticks]

I've used several power amps with my receivers, each has added its own "flavor" to the sound. I think a power amp would have to sound exactly the same as the receiver's amp not to. Odds of that are slim.

Generally, I've found receivers tend to skimp on the amp side of things.

As you can probably tell, I've been an advocate of adding external amps to receivers for a long time now as a cost effective upgrade.


1) I absolutely concur. "Smoother" is a deceptive word but somehow appropriate. When I added a Rotel to my gear the openess resulting from the expanded headroom was obvious. Moving to a McIntosh added the smoothness and a laid-back warmth.

2) Almost always

3) Me too, though not as long as my learned colleage associate Kex

[frenchmon]

Fair question, I've been asked that a few times before. It definitely sounds "smoother" at all volumes, and much easier on the ears at louder levels. I hate using "smoother" to describe sound, but that's the best word I can come up with. I'd say it changed the sound a bit to the warm side, bass is much more defined, and imaging and soundstage are noticeably improved. A fair upgrade all around, so yes, it changed the sound. The receiver didn't sound bad, but just not as good.

I've used several power amps with my receivers, each has added its own "flavor" to the sound. I think a power amp would have to sound exactly the same as the receiver's amp not to. Odds of that are slim.

Generally, I've found receivers tend to skimp on the amp side of things. I was using modest, 60 watt/channel Adcom amps from over a decade ago instead of my receiver's built in 120 watt/channel amps, and they were a noticeable upgrade too. My receiver has been bench tested by a few magazines and truly hit the 120 watt mark, but loudness/power doesn't always speak to sound quality, and I think the current capability of some slightly lower powered amps might be higher than most receivers. The Adcoms are probably modestly rated too. I think though that In modest size rooms with your typical entry levelish speakers, the benefits of adding quality external amplification is probably not as noticeable.

As you can probably tell, I've been an advocate of adding external amps to receivers for a long time now as a cost effective upgrade.

Thanks for the info.

frenchmon

[thedude65]

hey Kex, you are right in your explanation.I"m really not being fussy at all. I've never had a power amp before.When i looked at other comparable watts per channel amps to see how much cheaper the LPA-1 was, they were all rated from 20hz to 20khz, so i thought all amps were rated this way. i figured their superior power was what separated them from a/v receivers. I was just suprized to see 1khz in the LPA-1's manual. I fully believe you and Rich when you say its a quality amp,and i'm still interested.I was just caught off guard and surprized, that's all.Sorry for the misconception.

[Rich-n-Texas]

You're lucky I don't come over there and piss on your rug thedude! :biggrin5:

[thedude65]

Sorry about that to you to,Rich. Didn't mean to offend anyone. just suprized. p.s. after long usage, does the LPA-1 run hot?

[Mr Peabody]

Rich! after all we've done to get you potty trained.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Sorry about that to you to,Rich. Didn't mean to offend anyone. just suprized. p.s. after long usage, does the LPA-1 run hot?

Don't give it a second thought dude. Above all else, we're here to have fun and educate eachother as best we can. :thumbsup:

After listening to a 5.1 DVD at "concert levels" :yikes: and with a thermometer in the cabinet I measured 100 degrees at the top of the amp, and no ill effects whatsoever.

Right at this moment I'm listening/watching Led Zeppelin's Concert at Royal Albert Hall at "concert levels" :ihih: ; I put my hand on the amp's grill, and it's just warm. Pretty good considering we're talking Led Zeppelin here.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Rich! after all we've done to get you potty trained.
After 5 - 6 Tequila shots Mr. P., all rules go right outta the window!!! :o

BTW, limes down here are freakin' worthless, so I'm using squeeze container lime juice for my fixes. :(

[thedude65]

thanks Rich. 100 degrees and warm to the touch. that's nothing. I felt the top of the Onkyo 875 in a store one day and that baby was definetly more than 100 degrees and very hot to the touch!(i;m sure it was on all day but it was probably never pushed for too long in an audition):2:

[RoadRunner6]

Just looking at the published specs only, there are several tip-offs that this is a quality amp.

It weighs 63 lbs (the Outlaw Audio model 7125 at $1000 weighs 51 lbs).

It is rated at 125 watts with 5 channels driven, although at 1khz (probably quite conservative). The ACD rating is not important in normal real world performance but it is a good indicator of a strong amp.

It is rated at 125 watts at 8 ohms and 225 watts at 4 ohms. The 4 ohm rating is 90% of the theoretical rating of 250 watts into 4 ohms (theoretically the 4 ohm rating would be 2X the 8 ohm rating). This is an excellent spec and if accurate assures me that this is a beefy amp and very powerful with no problems at lower impedences.

At $500, if I needed a HT power amp, I would have ordered the LPA-1 in a heartbeat. Wow, what a great bargain!

RR6

[Rich-n-Texas]

:thumbsup:
1) I absolutely concur. "Smoother" is a deceptive word but somehow appropriate. When I added a Rotel to my gear the openess resulting from the expanded headroom was obvious. Moving to a McIntosh added the smoothness and a laid-back warmth.
Tighter, more detail, MUCH more low end punch are words I'd use. Also, I'm not just saying this as a means to an end because truthfully I still wasn't satisfied when I upgraded my receiver. Again, nothing to compare to but I was certain my listening room just wasn't being filled with the volume I thought the speakers were capable of delivering.

2) Almost always
Mr. sticks warned me right after the 3800 purchase that 5 B&W speakers would be a strain on the amp section. And even though he wouldn't sell me his Rotel ( :smilewinkgrin: ) he was right on with his observation.


3) Me too, though not as long as my learned colleage associate Kex
Me three. I'm the prodigal son.

[pixelthis]

You're lucky I don't come over there and piss on your rug thedude! :biggrin5:
just can't take you anywhere(especially beer drinkin:1:

[GMichael]

For all you guys who just bought Emotiva amps... Check out this deal on an Emotiva LMC-1 processor. $300 plus shipping.

http://av123forum.com/showthread.php?t=33388