You make a thoughtful point, lewm. I guess I'll see what happens once the 17 gets here.
Where to go from XP-15? XP-17? XP-25?
I've been happy with the XP-15 for a number of years - first supporting my modded AR ES-1, then a VPI Classic 3, and now my Avenger (my final stop, I hope). I love the fine adjustability of MC loading and the gain which will support running carts down to about .2 mV. But with the Avenger I think I've reached a point where I should consider a move, in part because everything I find about the XP-25 seems to indicate it is far and away an improvement over the XP-15. With the inclusion of the XP-17, however, I'm now a little hesitant.
I run two arms on the Avenger, so it might suggest going to the XP-25 is an easy decision, plus the well regarded sound quality (I've heard the 25 a number of times, but not in my own system). OTOH the XP-17 is based on some of the same technology that's in the XP-25, plus it's a one box solution (I kind of like that). The questions out there for anyone who can help - has anyone been able to compare the XP-17 to the XP-25? How do they sound compared to each other? Would the XP-17 be considered a step up or at least equal to the XP-25? If the XP-17 is generally considered a must try next to the 25, I can always run it face into the rack and keep the back end exposed for tonearm and loading changes (not pretty, but effective).
I'm also a little concerned about any change in sound from the previous generation Pass gear to the new (12, 22, 17, 27). I've read, for example, multiple views back and forth between the .5 and .8 series amps, a few saying Pass' reduction in negative feedback and modification to the second harmonic character in the .8 are not to their liking. I hadn't heard if there's been such a (perceived) change in the small signal Pass devices.
I run two arms on the Avenger, so it might suggest going to the XP-25 is an easy decision, plus the well regarded sound quality (I've heard the 25 a number of times, but not in my own system). OTOH the XP-17 is based on some of the same technology that's in the XP-25, plus it's a one box solution (I kind of like that). The questions out there for anyone who can help - has anyone been able to compare the XP-17 to the XP-25? How do they sound compared to each other? Would the XP-17 be considered a step up or at least equal to the XP-25? If the XP-17 is generally considered a must try next to the 25, I can always run it face into the rack and keep the back end exposed for tonearm and loading changes (not pretty, but effective).
I'm also a little concerned about any change in sound from the previous generation Pass gear to the new (12, 22, 17, 27). I've read, for example, multiple views back and forth between the .5 and .8 series amps, a few saying Pass' reduction in negative feedback and modification to the second harmonic character in the .8 are not to their liking. I hadn't heard if there's been such a (perceived) change in the small signal Pass devices.
- ...
- 30 posts total
Hey Tony, I realize this thread is a few years old but I would love to hear a follow up on your XP-17, assuming you did end up getting one from Reno? I am thinking about a XP-17 or perhaps a Modwright PH 9.0X. Both are approx. the same price, one tubed and one SS. The speakers I run are about 107db efficiency, so I would particularly like to know how quite you found the XP-17? |
@dgarretson The reference made to the Bocchino Products has been very useful, as I have been collecting information about suppliers of suitable Copper Connectors for my ongoing Projects being produced. I have been demonstrated WBT - Low Eddy RCA Connectors used on a Phonostage Chassis and used on a very expensive RCA Phono Cable as a A/B comparison to the Manufacturers selected connector. The WBT - Low Eddy configuration was in my view exceptional and stood out as the most attractive during the demonstrations. The 'envelope' of the note and vocal when being presented via the Low Eddy connection was seemingly tangible, definitely traceble at it manifested. This was one of the moments when there was no doubt, it was something to be aspired to. I can see from your Post you are quite willing to find a way to improve on your Circuits selected components, I am very comfortable with such practices and am sure you are receiving the best of the benefits. When my Phon' was produced for me, I had a input to the choice of certain components beyond the Designer/Builders selection. I purchased and gave them up for exchanges. Evaluations were only to take place after a 100ish hours of usage, achieved through using the Phon', via, a Hagerman Reverse RIAA and CDP on repeat play. The outcome of the Component exchanges as a comparison to the original Spec' was substantial, even the designer was unable to contain their thoughts and were appraising the positive impression made to the SQ. |
- 30 posts total