Point 5 vs Point 8 amplifiers

[Muser]

Please allow me to back into my question.

I have been using Pass’ XP10 and now XP12. They’re both good though I thought the latter is quieter, cleaner and more dramatically revealed the different color/tone saturation between differing DACs. I borrowed a Wells Audio Commander preamp, which immediately showed the XP12 to be less “weighty” and less liquid. Though I liked what it offered instantly, I’m not switching to the Commander.

I am considering a Pass amplifier to match with the XP12. My question relates to the difference in sonic character between the .5 and .8 amplifiers. For the moment, please leave aside the size of the amplifier - yes, I know that makes a significant difference - introducing that questions, drops the discussion into the weeds too soon for me. I am asking for impressions of the difference between the .5 and .8. Ultimately, I will give both a try, in my system but wanted to start with your impressions.

Assuming the same power rating, which of the two amplifier designs/technology produces a greater: 1) weightiness and 2) liquidity? What I’ve gleaned is that the .5 seems to reflect the XP10 sound quality - less finely grained, slightly noisier (noticeable but sufficiently “inaudible” that its effect is present but not enough to be described, at least by me) but a weightier sound. In turn the XP12 maybe matches the .8, which is to say quieter, more nuanced and neutral. (dropping some of the weightiness and liquidity for greater across the band transparency) Does the impression I’ve generated from reading comments match yours in reality?

If I’m totally off-base with your impressions, please share your experience. I know there are other brands to consider, but I'm inquiring here just about the Pass amps. In advance, thanks.

Larry

* I used the XP12 with powered ATC 20A speakers. I’ll be using the amplifier to drive Gamut L5 speakers. I’ve tried the XP12 with the Gamuts and they’re quite a good match.

 

[cjfrbw]

I think that Pass in his usual understated way said the .5 has the more classical 'clean' and neutral sound, while the .8 was allowed more harmonic palette with second and third order harmonics and some higher class A bias. He also says 'the shark must keep moving', which generally means commerce keeps producing new and different stuff, not necessarily better, but different. What you prefer would be up to you.

 

[Bruce B]

.5 here all the way!! Think I saw a video of Nelson the other day that was interesting....

 

[Muser]

cjfrbw:
Thanks. I know I'll end up with my own preference (trying not offend here), I wanted to read others' responses to shorten the path to "home." Too many years as an audiophile to want to continue resume the chase.

Bruce:
Thanks for the clip. I saw that. It was hard for me to discern whether Nelson answered my question. As I heard his response it sounded more like the changes were in soundstaging, which isn't really a priority for me. But, again, thanks for pointing me to the clip.

Larry

 

[Ron Resnick]

Welcome to WBF, Larry!

Our member PeterA, a long-time Pass Labs owner, I am sure in due course will see this thread and provide valuable commentary on your question. Coincidentally he has been analyzing .5 versus .8 amplifiers.

 

[JimmyS]

I’ve owned the 30.5, 60.5’s, 100.5’s, and now the 160.8’s. Peter’s writeup on the .5 vs .8 was spot on based on what I heard in my system.

My short summary is that if you prefer a slightly warmer presentation, the 0.5 series will not disappoint. The trade off here to the 0.8 will be a bit less control of the lower frequencies.

 

[PeterA]

Hello Muser, Welcome to WBF. I'm not sure that I can add much to this conversation. I have listened to my own Pass Labs amplifiers in my system, a few models in friend's systems, and I have read about and discussed the sonic signatures of the various different models with the folks at Pass Labs and Reno Hifi. I have owned the Aleph 3, Aleph5, Aleph 2, XA160, XA100.5 and XA160.5. I also heard a friend's XA160.8 in my system, though that was with my old Magico Mini 2 speakers.

Here is a link to my comments about the XS150, the XA160.5, and the XA160.8:
https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/review-pass-labs-xs-150-xa160-8-xa160-5.18813/#post-348246

I also recently read this excellent comparison between the XA160.5 and XA160.8 from a user on Audiogon: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/review-pass-labs-xa160-8-amplifier

I found the latter to be an extremely well written and informative opinion and one that analyzed the sound in a completely different way than I had. Basically, I think that each model within a specific line has a slightly different sound, not necessarily the result of having a different power rating. So for instance, listeners think the 100.5 and 200.5 sound more similar to each other than either does to the 160.5.

Complicating matters is that we listen to these amplifiers in specific contexts with different musical genres, volume levels, and sonic preferences. We even listen for different sonic attributes and we notice different things. I have also owned many different Pass preamps and phono stages. Each combination sounds different. So, with one amplifier, one may prefer a certain preamp over another, but with a different amp, the other preamp may sound better. In other words, it is the combination of a specific Pass preamp and amp that we are hearing. With my XA160.5 I preferred the XP20 to the XP30 because I found the cooler and what I perceived to be more tonally neutral signature of the 20 to work better with the slightly warmer tonal balance of the amp. But others may prefer a different balance. And I think the XP30 might be a better combination with the XA160.8.

I have recently switched to the new generation XP22 preamp and XP27 phono. These have a lower noise and cleaner sound than my former XP20/25 combination. This prompted me to experiment with cables because the sound was more transparent and resolving. It also prompted me to experiment again with speaker positioning.

When I directly compared my XA160.5 to my friend's XA160.8 in my system, I had the Magico Mini2. I now have the Magico Q3, which is more resolving, lower in distortion, and more extended, particularly in the lower frequencies. I have also learned more about the importance of set up and speaker positioning, in particular. I am fairly confident that I would have a different impression of the .8 in my system now, if I were to try it again, and I might now prefer it to the .5.

I think your best approach is to contact Pass Labs and a dealer and to discuss with them what you are trying to achieve. The partnering gear will make a difference, as well as the type of music and your preferences. They should suggest a couple of alternatives. Then, you really should audition each in your own system and live with them for a while. Have some friends over for a second opinion. Then make a decision.

You can read the two links above for the authors' impressions about the differences, and use that information as a general starting point, but you will need to hear them for yourself to know which is best for you. I will say that I did find that whenever I got an amp with more power, I preferred the sound in my system, but my speakers have been fairly difficult loads. With Pass Labs, you have many choices. They are extremely reliable products and one can often find good used or demo options allowing him to get one model up for a similar price. Enjoy the search. It should be fun.

 

[Muser]

Thank you all, your effort to share your experiences is appreciated.

Peter, thank you for your pointers. My interwebs search didn't find the audiogon "review." That added something to my pursuit, as did your thoughtful comments on your own experiences.

If there are others with thoughts, their comments are welcome. I do believe, however, I have been able to connect some of others' comments to my own experiences and will share those shortly.

Larry

 

[BlueFox]

Can't comment as to the difference between .5 and .8, but I can comment that I love my .5 amps, and Pass preamp.

 

[Muser]

Gentlemen:

Thanks for your input. The love of Pass is evident. I will continue my search for input. We sold my house and are in an apartment while our new house is rehabbed, so I'll venture into a store at some point to give Pass amplification a listen. I will post here if I have something to contribute or can forward the conversation usefully.

 

[tony22]

I spent a bit of time speaking with Kent over at Pass about this, as I've been considering purchase of a pair of X260.8 monos. In his explanation, the .8 series is comparatively "more linear" than the .5 at very low volumes and very high volumes (is this part of what is behind the descriptions of lower noise? more air?). Also in his explanations, the .5 series is slightly less adept at transient control in frequencies lower than around 120Hz or so. His thought was perhaps that's why some may like the .5 better - a sense of a bit more "umph" in that range as opposed to perhaps a clearer articulation (my words). I also asked Kent about what I'd seen regarding the "customization" of the front end and power sections of each .8 amp model to the output section. He did confirm this to be the case. I asked if that made the various .8s sound a bit more "different" from each other than perhaps the .5s. He felt this as well has some merit. Does this make picking the right .8 harder than a .5 series? I don't know. Maybe.

And yet, in some systems folks (my friend being one) still prefer the .5 over the .8. He's heard a X350.8 and a XA .8 (can't remember which one), and felt (heard in other systems) that he believed his .5 in his system sounded more like music. I respect his ears and his system, but while it seems the .5 series has been universally praised (or am I being revisionist?), it doesn't seem like the .8 praise has been quite as universal. I hope I'm wrong as I am hoping the 260.8 monos will be a good match in my own system. At this level system synergy is critical - maybe that's the bottom line with both these fine series of amps.

 

[PeterA]

I spent a bit of time speaking with Kent over at Pass about this, as I've been considering purchase of a pair of X260.8 monos. In his explanation, the .8 series is comparatively "more linear" than the .5 at very low volumes and very high volumes (is this part of what is behind the descriptions of lower noise? more air?). Also in his explanations, the .5 series is slightly less adept at transient control in frequencies lower than around 120Hz or so. His thought was perhaps that's why some may like the .5 better - a sense of a bit more "umph" in that range as opposed to perhaps a clearer articulation (my words). I also asked Kent about what I'd seen regarding the "customization" of the front end and power sections of each .8 amp model to the output section. He did confirm this to be the case. I asked if that made the various .8s sound a bit more "different" from each other than perhaps the .5s. He felt this as well has some merit. Does this make picking the right .8 harder than a .5 series? I don't know. Maybe.

And yet, in some systems folks (my friend being one) still prefer the .5 over the .8. He's heard a X350.8 and a XA .8 (can't remember which one), and felt (heard in other systems) that he believed his .5 in his system sounded more like music. I respect his ears and his system, but while it seems the .5 series has been universally praised (or am I being revisionist?), it doesn't seem like the .8 praise has been quite as universal. I hope I'm wrong as I am hoping the 260.8 monos will be a good match in my own system. At this level system synergy is critical - maybe that's the bottom line with both these fine series of amps.

Nice post, Tony. You summarize my view quite well in your final sentence. I would add that "system synergy", at least as I see it, has a lot to do with "listener preference". One can mix and match any number of Pass amps and preamps and achieve quite a range of different sonic balances. I have only done a little of that at home, but each time the sound changes. I was told by either Reno or by the folks at Pass that even the 100.5 and 200.5 sound more similar to each other than either does to the 160.5. So, one might prefer the XP 20 or XP 30, depending on which amp it is paired with. Same for the XP22 and XP32. Depending on power requirements, budget and perhaps other factors, which Pass series preamp is matched with one of them or a .8 series amp can change the sound in clear ways. I think it is best to try to listen for yourself to particular combinations.

 

[tony22]

Thanks Peter. I'm jumping with no net on this one - which is very unusual for me. I can get the monos at a great price used, but from the current owner. So no return once they're in my hands. However, I know Leif has an INT-250 that he's used with his Endeavors, and Kent said they've heard the X250.8 perform very well with other VSA speakers. I'm gambling that my XP-20 and XP-17 will link up with the X260.8s to be a good match with my own Endeavor SEs.

 

[tony22]

One area that has my head scratching going is a comment I remember being made about a comparison between the X250.5 and X250.8, where the .5 was preferred by the owner because he felt the .5 had more "bite" than the .8, which was described as "rounder". Specifically he felt the .5 had better performance as heard through instruments like cellos where he heard more "rosin on the bow". The impression being - what - better transient capability in this area? I'm not sure.

 

[tony22]

I guess I’ll see how things work out in my own system. A pair of X260.8s is on its way to my house.

 

[GSOphile]

One area that has my head scratching going is a comment I remember being made about a comparison between the X250.5 and X250.8, where the .5 was preferred by the owner because he felt the .5 had more "bite" than the .8, which was described as "rounder".

I would have expected the opposite. Kent English at Pass Customer Service will be able to give you an honest and highly educated opinion on the character of the various Pass offering alternatives.

 

[thedudeabides]

Have not compared but have owned the 250.5 now for twelve years and counting. Only hiccup is the front voltage dial stopped moving. No big deal.

Per the above post, I have considered going to the 0.8 series and have chosen not to. Part of the reason is that I tried the 350.5 and preferred the 250.5 "in my system". It's interesting that the various pass lab amps have a slightly different but audible / significant voicing characteristics assuming your system is up to it. I found that the 350.5, although more transparent, lost some of the body and tonal fullness of the 250.5 so, as others have stated, it all comes down to system matching and personal preferences.

As an aside, I had a wonderful chat with Kent last week regarding sending it in to repair the dial and checking everything else to insure it's operating at 100%. Surprisingly, the ship costs will likely exceed the parts / labor costs. And I must state that Kent is "over the top" regarding his professionalism and knowledge of the entire pass line. One example. I asked about replacing the capacitors and he said he is now seeing failure from units made in the early 90's. Talk about reliability and brut force industrial design. Never thought I would not be replacing my amp (sometime in the future but I tend to hold on to my gear for a long time) when I purchased it but, for the here and now, it appears that will be the case.

To the OP, good luck with your new purchase.

 

[Don C]

Another consideration with the xa.5 vs xa.8, is that the .8 series draws 50% more power out of the wall, and generates more heat.

To me this is a drawback.

I love my xa60.5 because it sounds great and does not put out much heat. I leave it on 24/7/365. It is always warmed up and ready to play.

 

[Audire]

Having now owned the 260.8s for a few weeks, they are just awesome. They don't get hot - warm yes - but hot NO. As far as .5 vs .8 I think it boils down to (1) preference; (2) room dynamics and (3) system synergy. While I may upgrade my speakers later, this is my last set of amps.