Amps Emotiva vs Outlaw vs ??

[surfcane]

Just looking for some feedback on amps
say UPA-1 mono vs UPA-2 vs Outlaw 2200 monoblocks vs say the outlaw 7075 or 7125 for future expansion or some other suggestions

- I am looking more for 2 channel - will use for the new towers and/or sierra 1s that I already have.

Listen to say 70% music 30% movies.

Will probably use new Yamaha or Onkyo receiver - again in research mode.

Thanks for any thoughts or other suggestions - will probably prefer new to looking at audigon or some other source - B stock is fine with me

[curtis]

I would not make an amplifier a priority until you believe the receiver you choose won't have enough power for what you want.

The Outlaw 7075 doesn't really provide any more power than a good receiver.

The Outlaw 7125, as well, does not have more power than a good receiver(depending on how the receiver is rated). It is made for Outlaw by a reputable company (ATI).

Myself, I am skeptical of Emotiva amps when compared to other more established brands. On the flip side, there are many happy Emotiva amp owners. It would be interesting to see how many of those Emotiva amp owners have owned other amps.

Don't be afraid of used amps. There are some very good deals out there.

[scape]

i myself have been looking at getting a samson servo amp-- usually used for pro monitoring studios. I have listened to a 120 model and really liked the sound; clean and rather effortless sounding. I think I may spend my money on the servo600 model. stereo 8ohm its 225watts/each channel. later down the road i could buy a second and take each amp and bridge them into mono channel amps- 600 watts output then. check them out.

[choirbass]

having used a <135w/ch jvc 6.1 a/v receiver for direct analog, and a couple other similar budget ones as well, such as the low wattage t-amps i mistakenly used, i can definitely say that my current pre/pro amp (in signature) is quiet a large step up acoustically; weighing 100lbs as it is for both, im not surprised anyhow. repeated a/b comparisons, etc. so its not really a pseudo effect either.

everything would probably sound even further improved with better speakers, but with what i have, absolutely no complaints :)

ps - i had used some other a/v's with lower grade speakers (sony), couldnt really tell much of a difference acoustically; the speakers were limiting enough as it was.

[GirgleMirt]

i myself have been looking at getting a samson servo amp-- usually used for pro monitoring studios. I have listened to a 120 model and really liked the sound; clean and rather effortless sounding. I think I may spend my money on the servo600 model. stereo 8ohm its 225watts/each channel. later down the road i could buy a second and take each amp and bridge them into mono channel amps- 600 watts output then. check them out.
Servo as in Servo or Servo as in it's not a servo amp but we'll call it servo none the less? If servo as in servo, how could this work without censors in speakers? :confused:

[DougMac]

Servo as in Servo or Servo as in it's not a servo amp but we'll call it servo none the less? If servo as in servo, how could this work without censors in speakers? :confused:
I auditioned some speakers with censors. When I put on Zappa, the room went quiet! :D Sorry, couldn't resist.

I bought an Onkyo TX-NR808 because it has pre-outs, thinking that I'd use an external amp for at least the fronts. So far, it has been able to comfortably drive my Ascends to as loud as I ever want to go. I have been thinking of an Emotiva XPA-3, but have never heard one.

[scape]

servo as in name, it doesnt have any servo sensors like in a rythmik or anything. to my knowledge all amps do have damping to a degree, which can help control speaker movement, and possibly even interfere with it- but i don't think that's why they named it servo. who knows tho, marketing people come up with all sorts of weird names to things..

i'm in the process of possibly buying a new AVR just so i have pre-outs and the option to expand to external amps. during movies with epic scores playing during a loud scene, i think my avr's amps begin clipping; which an external amp would handle no problem i bet. personally, i think the differences in sound between some modern day amps are pretty minimal; i think the differences in power handling, quality of components used, feature set (connections, mounting, dsp, bridging) are larger. bridging is on my top list of requirements for an amp, which for some reason the emotiva's do not do, or maybe i read over that.

[choirbass]

i'm in the process of possibly buying a new AVR just so i have pre-outs and the option to expand to external amps. during movies with epic scores playing during a loud scene, i think my avr's amps begin clipping; which an external amp would handle no problem i bet. personally, i think the differences in sound between some modern day amps are pretty minimal; i think the differences in power handling, quality of components used, feature set (connections, mounting, dsp, bridging) are larger. bridging is on my top list of requirements for an amp, which for some reason the emotiva's do not do, or maybe i read over that.

I know I have fairly limited experience from complete a/v's to separates, but if youre looking for power output primarily (referring to bridging specifically), a powered amp in itself would seem to fill that, even with no bridging. you 'could' simply just passively biamp separate posts (since each channel with emos is a seperate mono amp essentially). the upa-7 im using is a consistent 125w/ch over 8ohms. so you could make it a consistent 250w amp/speaker if you really wanted to (it is somewhat overkill imo, at least with these, cant say i have much of a desire for deafness, lol). and the unused amps will simply allow it to dedicate more power to used amps. (many a/v's have subpar psus anyhow, which is why the rated rms output really isnt reliable, and if anything, a lie in most cases, since they just list peak temporary output oftentimes, and their power is even further hindered the more channels are being used simultaneously; only so much to go around, so all of the channels used end up suffering in that case.)

the pre/pro im more hesistant to suggest since many have complaints, mainly with hdcp over hdmi if nothing else (cable box, satellite box, dvr, etc, all of which use inconsistant hdcps, causing numerous problems in general with each other, not complete incompatibility, but problems nonetheless. otherwise though, without the copyright restrictions, the umc-1 is wonderful sounding, primarily over analog, since thats all i use really. ive pretty much avoided hdmi in general anyhow, so this isnt an issue. but, knowing i was just using analog mainly and doing without said restrictions, problems shouldnt have been an issue, and they havent :)

my 2 cents