Which speakers do you have?
The INT 150 is a newer generation amp & preamp,
compared to the X1 & X250. I'd get the Int if that's enough
power for your room/speakers. |
Sonically speaking I the INT 150 is better than an original X250 and X1. I have heard the INT 150 up against the X250 and X1. Granted my comparison was done on a pair of Wilson Sophia 2s. If I had a choice I would go with INT 150. Lots of power is not everything but great sound is. |
danielk:
my speaker is dynaudio C-1.
room is medium size apt.
soundhouse:
i been reading a lot and know that PASS series X.5 is way better amp than X series.
as i try several amp,the more the watt the better the sound. |
Hi,
I'm using an X250 and X2.5 to drive a Maggie 1.7 but recently auditioned an X350.5 driving a Sophia 3 which I ended up buying (owner upgrading to the Monos XA series) as I'm planning to upgrade to a 3.7. I think you should try a side-by-side comparison as IMHO you wouldn't gain much with the INT150. The X250 is good in my book and I think your Dynaudio will benefit from the extra power. FYI, prior to the Pass, I've had a Pathos Logos (integrated hybrid @110W per channel) and a Densen Pre-Power which weren't up to speed when driving the Maggies. Anyway, I hope you enjoy the amp. Cheers. |
Zeebee,
I don't think you realized that the X .5 sounds a bit differently than the older X series. I also have the X350.5. Prior to purchasing mine, I had heard one in a friend's system in a side-by-side comparison against a X350. The original 350 deviated from the Pass signature sound quite a bit, and sounded more cold, sterile. The X .5 seemed to infuse the midrange magic from the Aleph series into these amps. I don't know anything about the INT-150 and have not heard it myself.
Adding the X1 will help to some degree. I had heard both the X1 and the X0.2 in my friend's system. The Pass press had more warmth than the ARC REF 2 Mk I with stock tubes. Depending on how much warmth you are looking for, this may or may not be enough (to your liking). I like the 350.5 very much, but wouldn't touch the 350 with a 10 foot pole.
FrankC |
I would also consider the INT-30A which is based on the XA.5 series. The power spec is conservative though it may not have enough for your speakers with which I am unfamiliar. You should contact Pass with this question. Kent is very good at describing differences in the product line. If you have a local Pass dealer, audition the different suggestions in your system if possible. |
Zeebee:
thanks,i'm just looking to add some warm sound in my set up.
but i will consider to change to series X.5 if that is the route.
Gundam:
maybe i will love the X350.5 but now i can only get the X250.5
as my budget allow.)
Peterayer:
awesome system u have there.)
power rate really my concern,the amp now push class A around first 40w,but i still thinking not enough. |
My comments were meant to touch on the subject of how different the X .5 series is from the non .5 series. The comments I made for the X350.5 vs. X350 should also apply to X250.5 vs. X250.
There are just as many people that will say that X250.5 is better than X350.5 as the other way around. Since I own the X350.5, I cannot be objective. ;-) I don't know anyone local with an X250.5. Otherwise, I would love to do a side-by-side shootout.
FrankC |
I have heard both the X350 and the X350.5 and I do not think they sound as differently as everyone has been saying. I have auditioned both courtesy of members of my audio club. I do hear more detail in the X350.5 but the signature is still the same. I think that what I heard is borne out in the changes that Nelson has made in the X.5 series. He replaced the front end Fets with Jfets that have much lower noise. I think thats where the extra detail comes from. The extra output devices will give a little more power but I think it does not change the amplifier's signature. Pass always biased his amplifiers pretty hard to get the output fets to operate a little more linear. Does the X350.5 sound better? Absolutely! The details are more apparent in the X.5 amps but the amps have the same sonic signature and do sound very similar with the X.5 amps revealing some hidden details. |
I own a Bel Canto DAC3, and have owned an X1 pre which I have upgraded to a Pass XP10. I'd characterize the X1 on the cooler side of neutral. If you are looking for more warmth and dynamics, I'd urge you to go to an XP10. It will also add a bit of bass warmth too, but still keep the depths you have been getting. I have run the DAC3 direct as a pre, and didn't get the dynamics and soundstage I wanted, but am getting it in droves with the XP10. There have been a few offered here around 3K lately, which is a bargain for the quality. Good luck! |
liguy:
thanks for explanation,
swanny:
added XP10 still out of my budget but,i think i'm better try INT-150 since they have XP10 as preamp:O |
Hi Honeyooi,
I have an INT-150. It will drive your speakers just fine. The INT-30A will as well unless you really push the dbs. The INT-150 has been described as a 150.5 plus the XP10, but this is really not the case. There is no real "preamp" section in the 150, just a buffer for volume control. The INT-150 is not warm sounding, just low distortion. I would describe it as clear and full range. Really nice. You should listen to one and let us know what you think. |
hi karl,sorry for late response.)
yes,now i'm tend to change my set to INT-150.
so far my listening habits is bad,louder the better for me.
also the C-1 come alive when push it louder too:-) |
I haven't seen any measured data from any '250 or '350 series Pass amp.
However, the INT-150 was close to 200 watts @8ohms and 300 watts at 4ohms.
The XA30.5? That hit about 100 watts @8ohms and 200 watts @ 4ohms....while being firmly A/B at that power.
All distortion was 1%. I suspect these amps will also drive some weird reactive loads well, too, based simply on weight. The powersupply and heatsinking is quite generous.
Based simply on power vs listening habits, I wouldn't hesitate for 1 second to try the INT-150 with my Magnepan 1.6s which are an 'easy' load, though somewhat low in sensitivity. |
