Pass XA.5 vs XA.8

slowikpl said:
I Love now my 60.8 and I’m now consider to 100.8 upgrade. Are there sound differences between the two. Has anybody experience on this ?
Click to expand...

Congrats on your Pass XA60.8 and Pass XP20. I found the bass to be a bit more prevalent on the 100.8. It may - and I wasn't 100% convinced - but may play a bit bigger, creating an ever so slightly bigger soundstage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
[SUB]​[/SUB]
Mike said:
Congrats on your Pass XA60.8 and Pass XP20. I found the bass to be a bit more prevalent on the 100.8. It may - and I wasn't 100% convinced - but may play a bit bigger, creating an ever so slightly bigger soundstage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Thanks Mike.

Can you also say that the sound is little fuller ( whatever that means ???? ) according to the response from Pass Labs:

a The XA100.8 is a little fuller sound than the XA60.8 but the difference is small relative to other equipment. All the Point 8 class A amp have a similar sonic signature but all are slightly different because of the differences in rail voltage, bias current and no of output devices.tle fuller sound than the XA60.8 but the difference is small relative to other equipment. All the Point 8 class A amp have a similar sonic signature but all are slightly different because of the differences in rail voltage, bias current and no of output devices.
 
slowikpl said:
[SUB]​[/SUB]

Thanks Mike.

Can you also say that the sound is little fuller ( whatever that means ???? ) according to the response from Pass Labs:

a The XA100.8 is a little fuller sound than the XA60.8 but the difference is small relative to other equipment. All the Point 8 class A amp have a similar sonic signature but all are slightly different because of the differences in rail voltage, bias current and no of output devices.tle fuller sound than the XA60.8 but the difference is small relative to other equipment. All the Point 8 class A amp have a similar sonic signature but all are slightly different because of the differences in rail voltage, bias current and no of output devices.
Click to expand...

Yes, fuller, but because the 100.8 has more bass. That's going to give it a fuller sound.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mike said:
Well, its been a few months since the XA.8's rolled out. What is the consensus? Is the XA.8 an evolution? A misstep? What's the honest consensus of Pass owners?

I recently compared the XA100.5 vs XA100.8 and have my own thoughts - but wanted to see what others have observed.

Back to the original question as above.

i have moved from Xa 30.5 to Xa 100.8. In my experience the .8 is an evolution.
Maybe i am not qualified to say this as i have not compared the Xa 100.8 to the Xa 100.8 or Xa 30.5 to Xa 30.8.
Click to expand...
 
Hi Alfa,

.
With XA 60.8 I realized that this amp I was listening too my gear less and less of my music. The XA 60.8 Is like my Hypex NC1200 or Devialet 250 amp. Just good quality music reproduction. Nothing more . No soul or emotional connection that is so important for me in music reproduction.
I will be return my pass XA 60.8 and purchase the 160.5 and will make some writing on it.
With 160.5 I hope this will change and I will return to listen my music with smile on my face.
 
Hi slowikpi
Is that you prefer the .5 over the .8 series or more power from the 160.5 vs the 60.8?
if the former then why not go for the Xa60.5, if the latter why not go for the 160.8?
 
slowikpl said:
Hi Alfa,

.
With XA 60.8 I realized that this amp I was listening too my gear less and less of my music. The XA 60.8 Is like my Hypex NC1200 or Devialet 250 amp. Just good quality music reproduction. Nothing more . No soul or emotional connection that is so important for me in music reproduction.
I will be return my pass XA 60.8 and purchase the 160.5 and will make some writing on it.
With 160.5 I hope this will change and I will return to listen my music with smile on my face.
Click to expand...

I understand this. I prefer the XA160.5 in my system and the XA160.8 in my friend MadFloyd's system. They are different sounding and I think Pass just could not justify having so many different models currently available: X.5, XA.5, X.8, XA.8 plus the integrated amps, plus the XS. And the .5 faceplate was expensive to produce. I prefer the XS150 to both amps.

With the right room and system, the XA.5, now discontinued, is an incredible value on the used market.
 
PeterA said:
I understand this. I prefer the XA160.5 in my system and the XA160.8 in my friend MadFloyd's system. They are different sounding and I think Pass just could not justify having so many different models currently available: X.5, XA.5, X.8, XA.8 plus the integrated amps, plus the XS. And the .5 faceplate was expensive to produce. I prefer the XS150 to both amps.

With the right room and system, the XA.5, now discontinued, is an incredible value on the used market.
Click to expand...

Was Ian's power working properly when he had the XA-160.5? I know his power was fixed while he had the XA-160.8.

Ken
 
Alpinist said:
Was Ian's power working properly when he had the XA-160.5? I know his power was fixed while he had the XA-160.8.

Ken
Click to expand...

I can't remember at this point. I did compare them in my system with the same power conditions, and in his system with the same power conditions. I do know that Ian compared the two after his power was fixed and preferred the .8 but I was not there. My suspicion is that the .5 did not have enough power to properly drive his M Pros. I did the comparison with my Mini IIs and with Ian's S5s, but I can't remember if it was before or after he took the EquiTech transformers out of the circuit.
 
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]My New XA 60.8 are replaced by XA 160.5 [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Those amps are huge compared to 60.8.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Now I' burning the properly in : 5 days straight on , 5 days 12h on and 12H completely off the nets. And the 5 days 12h on and 12h standby.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]So in about 15 days I will begin some critical listening.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]I hope those AMPs wil not let me down and I expect to keep them longer than point 8 amp.[/FONT]
 
slowikpl said:
My New XA 60.8 are replaced by XA 160.5
Those amps are huge compared to 60.8.
Now I' burning the properly in : 5 days straight on , 5 days 12h on and 12H completely off the nets. And the 5 days 12h on and 12h standby.
So in about 15 days I will begin some critical listening.


I hope those AMPs wil not let me down and I expect to keep them longer than point 8 amp.
Click to expand...

Don't worry, you will love them. There is a certain magic to the sound of the XA-160.5. One thing you should note, the XA.5 amps need to warm up longer than the XA.8 amps before they really hit their stride. In my opinion, about 4 hours for the XA.5 to start producing that magical sound. About half that time for the XA.8 amps to hit their stride. This could be because the XA.8 is more heavily biased into Class A. But don't worry, it is so worth the wait. :)

Best,
Ken
 
I was during those 2 days since I purchased the 160.5 hesitate to write something here. But I could not brake myself to do it.
First of al from the beginning it was very pleasant sound form 160.5. It sounded little like my pervious XA 60.8 , very good detail. But lifeless and with a little soft Bass.
The sound is very like Aleph X DIY amp yet more controlled because I think of the amount of power.
After like 24h the amps ware even more detailed and began have the crispy yet natural presence. Natural on the warm very ORGANIC side of the sound. This is real sound for me! And I can't explain how, but I began to hear things in the treble that I was missing out my pervious XA 60.8 !!
After 36h they finally began to call me for attention with those extra information on the tracks. This nuances are very important for me and making in my head more realistic presentation. It is more emotional listening!
In comparison with XA 60.8 they are in Bass region not that detailed as I was already familiar with. The Bass punch me in belly, just not on my whole body like point 8. What I mean is that the bass on point 8 are more detailed. But this is for me less important. Maybe it will evolve during the burn-in time.
I have read on the net that during burn-in time the sound on the point 5 will be even more organic?! As for me I can't imagine that, but sure hope for :-)


What for me is very important that the bad records sounds bearable to my years with this amp.
Oh boy I'm so pleased with it so far, and I want more :-)


I will update this post later on during the burn in time. For me the point 8 is very neutral amp with tight bass and the Point 5 is emotional amp and life like.
 
Two days on brand new XA 160.5's is not nearly broken in. They will get much better over the next week or two, and then continue to improve slowly for months after that.

The Point 5's are very different from the Point 8's - they both have their strengths and weaknesses. It depends on your preferences and your system which will sound best to you.

That said, it's really not a fair fight between the XA 160.5's and the XA 60.8's. They occupy different niches within their respective lines.
 
Spent an hour too long with a year old fully broken in XA 30.8. I don't understand the love for these amps.

The low end is hugely powerful, the high mids/top rather painful in my system.
 
lucey said:
Spent an hour too long with a year old fully broken in XA 30.8. I don't understand the love for these amps.

The low end is hugely powerful, the high mids/top rather painful in my system.
Click to expand...

What speakers? Was the needle jumping around on the amp?
 
Lucey
Difficult to comprehend it is.
Do tell us more about the rest of the system and whether you waited for warm up which takes at least 1 to 4 hours.
 
The room is beyond excellent. I'm a mastering engineer. Warm up was 9 hours. The unit is fully broken in. Pre amp is discrete class A Crane Song Avocet, had it for 10 years, very musical and still accurate. Speakers are Sonics by Joachim Gerhard Allegra (birch ply, not Immedia Allegra)

Needle moved a little at volume but the amp was just not beautiful in the mids and top at any volume. Low end overpowering. Image not large or 3D as compared to the V12R I'm used to. The midrange was recessed. High mids hard. The distinction between all recordings frequency balance was less than tubes reveal I couldn't hear digital vs analog tape productions as well as I'm used to

Other amps here are push pull triodes from Cary. V12R for 5 years with NOS front end and 8 Treasure 6CA7-Z. 211 monos on demo with slightly upgraded tubes.

I demoed the XA.5 years ago and the mids were better but it also lacked the size and 3D depth of the V12R.


I respect Nelson and don't mean to troll. I thought maybe he had something that could balance neutrality and euphonics. The freq balance, size and depth were a let down.
Maybe in 5-10 years I'll try another SS amp. .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top