I'd like to hear from someone who has taken RENO HiFi's offer for a favorable trade-in exchanging the XP-20 for the XP-30. But I think it's still a bit early as this new pre was just released.
I have read that the old X0.2 sounded better than the old X1. I think this is simply the completed XP line replacing the X line of pre amps.
It does take up a lot of rack space, especially if one adds the two box XP-25 phono.
Wait until the new line of amps hits the market. |
Hthaller,
Thank you very much for that informative and detailed write-up. I have the XA160.5 and XP-20 and Xono. Based on your experience, would I be better served by replacing the XP-20 with the XP-30, or the Xono with the XP-15 or XP-25?
Like you, I have deep Pass Labs experience rather than broad. I've owned the Aleph 3, 5, 2, the Ono, Xono, Aleph P, X-1, XP-20, XA160, XA100.5 and XA160.5. I've always wanted to meet Mark Sammut and the guys at Pass.
It's a great company with great products. Thanks for sharing your experience. |
I also am quite pleased with how holographic or 3D my system sounds with the XP-20. However, this was improved by placing the XP-20 and other components in my rack on Vibraplane and Townshend Seismic Sink isolation platforms. The increased isolation allows very subtle ambient cues captured on some recordings to become apparent through the system. I think it has to do with superior needle/groove contact. I don't know what is happening when I put my SS electronics on the isolation platforms, but the sound improves and one area of improvement is imaging and presence.
The XP-20 is very good in my system and I'm sure the XP-30 is even better, though I have not yet heard it. |
I just read the TAS review. I'm disappointed that there was not some comparison made to the XP-20 or other top preamps. Anthony Cordesman should have done the review as he is the TAS guy who knows Pass gear. Also the review was very short and there were just as many pages with photos as there were pages with text. I actually didn't think it was such a good review. It mentions how close SS and tube designs have become and yet in the very same issue, Nelson Pass himself states the the two typologies are diverging.
A couple of user reviews here on Audiogon would probably be more helpful.
I found the Constellation gear review by JV to be much more informative. |
I've been given the opportunity to borrow an XP-30 for a few days. I own an
XP-20 and figured the only way to really know how they differ is to
compare them directly in my system. As Petrushka mentioned, the XP-30
benefits from at least 24 hours of warm up. I've been listening now for five
days and have a sense of how it compares to my XP-20.
First, it is quieter. The noise floor is lower. I only listen to vinyl and the
backgrounds are slightly blacker than with the 20. Of course, this
increases signal to noise, so micro details are more easily heard. Overall
resolution is higher than with the XP-20. But also, there seems to be less
distortion allowing me to listen a bit louder with absolutely no fatigue.
Timbral accuracy is improved and there is slightly more hall information.
I've never heard the cello as played by Starker sound so pure. Tone is
simply beautiful. The definition of instruments in space is also clearer.
Some or all of these improvements may be due to the separate gain chassis
for each channel. The effect is not unlike when I compared an Aleph 5 to a
pair of Aleph 2s. Channel separation increased and crosstalk diminished.
The frequency extremes also seem slightly more extended. The bass is
better and the midrange is a bit fuller with more weight, but this is
balanced by better high frequency extension and detail, so I would not
really describe it as warmer. It still seems well balanced. The increased
clarity and extension is more noticeable in my system than is a shift in
tonal balance. Bass, in particular, seems more articulate, deeper and better
defined than it is with the 20. This reminds me of when I switched from
the SME V to the V-12 arm. The latter sounded more relaxed and
moredetailed at the same time with a better articulated bottom end.
Soundstage width is about the same as with the 20. Depth is
slightly better, but more important is the improved sense of layering and
image location, definition and solidity. The sound is also slightly bigger. It
projects more into the room making the music more present.
These differences are not subtle, but they are clear and definite. At the
same time, they are not huge. I've learned not to expect such things. It is
not so much a case of diminishing returns as it is a case for incremental
and steady improvement. After a certain level, to some of us any
improvement is worth celebrating. The improvement is quite noticeable
and the XP-30 is certainly the best preamp that I've had in my system. I
think the degree to which one thinks the 30 is better than the 20 will be
very dependent on the resolution of his or her system. Whether it is worth
it to upgrade will depend on available rack space and how much of a
difference one is able to hear. Because the 30 is considerably more
expensive than the 20, I will leave the issue of value to everyone to decide
for himself.
In my system, the XP-20 sounds great and I'm extremely happy with it.
Perhaps it was a curse to hear the XP-30, but I could not resist the
opportunity. It is definitely better, as one would expect for the additional
cost. I think that the XP-30 is the best preamp that Wayne has designed. It is
a real achievement and he should be commended. |
Petrushka, Thanks for sharing those comments about the various models. I'm wondering what the bigger improvement would be with the following two choises:
1. Upgrade from the XONO to the XP-25
2. Upgrade from the XP-20 to the XP-30
The XP-25 has the front controls for convenience, but has far fewer settings. The two inputs don't matter to me because I only have one arm/cartridge. The XP 30 is great, but it would be a more expensive upgrade.
French_fries, I owned a used Aleph P and it was great for the money, but the PASS X-1 that replaced it was much better, IMO. And the XP-30 is much better still. It does seem like overkill to have all of these boxes and cables. Consider the XP-25, XP-30 and a pair of the new Xs amps. That's nine (9) boxes with lots of connectors. Imagine the space needed. You could certainly buy a one-box integrated amp with built-in phono circuit instead, but the sound would not be as sweet.
After listening to the XP-30 for a week, the added rack space needed for the three boxes is a small price to pay for the glorious sound. If they could upgrade my XP-20 to a 20.5 which sounds like the 30 for a small fee, yes, that would be fantastic, but I doubt that option will ever be available. Perhaps in a few years there will be a small one box preamp based on the SIT chip which will change the whole game and footprint.
They certainly are "...absolutely dedicated to great sound...." |
Petrushka, That is indeed very interesting and helps to explain its high performance. I had a friend over tonight to do some more listening to the XP-30. He brought over some of his favorite LPs and was very impressed with the improvement over my XP-20. He knows my system well. One of the topics we discussed is the polemic that audio reviewers espouse, namely that a component usually falls into one of two camps: the accurate (read analytical, hyper detailed and often sterile) or the musical (read euphonic, warm, beautiful).
My friend and I have always been puzzled with these seemingly opposed camps. To us, something that sounds accurate, ie. like real music, is by definition "Musical" with a capital "M". It is highly resolving and beautiful at the same time. The XP-30 is an example of a component that does just that. There is such a level of resolution, lack of distortion and great detail, and dare I say "accuracy", that it is the most "(M)usical" pre amp that I, and my friend, have heard.
It was a most memorable evening. |
Zen, I have not had the opportunity to here the Hegel P30. It must be quite something judging from your raves here and on other threads. I have heard the XP-30 in my system for ten days and it is the best pre amp that I have had in my system.
Have you heard the XP-30? I know how specifications can mean everything to some readers. Listeners, on the other hand, form opinions about how components sound relative to each other.
"Old school engineering" is why people still love horn, tube, vinyl components. Specifications are great, but listening is what matters to most of us. |
No. I got the point. I personally prefer lower noise and less distortion too. However, I also have to like the way a component sounds in my system. That's why I have the components I have. I have not heard the Hegel P30 and can not comment on its sound. Sorry. |
That is a very interesting comment. Love it! I've got the XP-20 and can't yet afford to buy the XP-30. What was in the rest of that system in NY? |
