Pass Labs .8 Series!

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,669
10,942
3,515
USA
I'm not sure which speakers they voiced the amp for, but I'm guessing it's geared toward a variety of speakers typically used with Pass.

It's nice to hear from a dealer. Do you know which speakers Pass uses while developing product? Also, which speakers would you say are typically used with Pass? In Europe, I understand that Pass/Wilson is a popular combination. I use Magico, and Eggleston before that, but both are such difficult loads, that I've had to upgrade to the bigger Pass amps to drive these brands. Thanks for your input.

Incidentally, my buddy just got XA160.8 to compare to his XA160.5s. He will be waiting a long time to break them in. I told him that I would not come over to listen for at least ten days or until he has told me he hears no more changes.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,669
10,942
3,515
USA
With a great deal of anticipation, I'm going tonight to hear a pair of XA160.8s directly compared in the same system to a pair of XA160.5s. I own the latter, so I know them well. Both pairs are broken in now and we will listen to a combination of familiar music on both analog and digital sources. I'll report back when I have a sense of their differences. If I can be patient enough, I'll encourage the owner to describe the differences first.
 

Frank750

VIP/Donor
Jul 8, 2011
821
1
928
With a great deal of anticipation, I'm going tonight to hear a pair of XA160.8s directly compared in the same system to a pair of XA160.5s. I own the latter, so I know them well. Both pairs are broken in now and we will listen to a combination of familiar music on both analog and digital sources. I'll report back when I have a sense of their differences. If I can be patient enough, I'll encourage the owner to describe the differences first.

Looking forward to your assessment Peter.
 

MadFloyd

Member Sponsor
May 30, 2010
3,080
775
1,700
Mass
Same here! :D
 

Frank750

VIP/Donor
Jul 8, 2011
821
1
928

MadFloyd

Member Sponsor
May 30, 2010
3,080
775
1,700
Mass

LL21

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2010
14,430
2,518
1,448
Wow...this will be fun. Look forward to reading.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,669
10,942
3,515
USA
Last night Ian (MadFloyd) invited me and two other good audio buddies over to compare the Pass Labs .5 amps to the newest .8 amps. He uses an entire Pass Labs chain of electronics: XP25, XP30 and XA160.5. I also have an all Pass chain consisting of the XP25, XP20 and the XA160.5. But the similarities end there. I have the limited range Magico Mini 2 speakers in a small enclosed space while Ian uses full range Wilson Alexias in a large, open space. The sound of our systems has always struck me as quite different, but that impression has been radically changed after last night's listening session. More about that later.

Ian has in for audition a pair of the newest XA160.8 mono blocks. He has had them for just over a week and they have been either playing music or plugged in for almost all of that time, so they should be just at the end of the break-in period. He told us that the sound has stabilized. The four of us were eager to compare the sound of the two amps. We are all familiar with Ian's system so it was with some excitement that we sat down to listen. We started off with the .5 listening to familiar digital cuts and then to some vinyl. There were perhaps eight cuts in total with a variety of pop, jazz and classical. We then switched the input and speaker cables and listened to the .8 amps using the same cuts in reverse order starting with the vinyl and ending with the digital.

When we were finished, Ian asked: "So, do you guys have a preference?". Two of us said "yes" without hesitation. The third friend said that he wanted to hear more music before commenting. Well, thinking that the one guy and I were in agreement, I figured that there was a clear preference and all that we would discuss was how they differed and perhaps guess about why that was the case. To my surprise, the other fellow preferred the .5 while I preferred the .8. So that was rather interesting. As the evening continued that preference for the .5 was for one of the formats, either digital or analog, but I forget. Apparently, after the less committal friend and I left, Ian and the remaining friend stayed to listen for a while longer and again this morning. They now both prefer the .8 for reasons they may explain on the forum later.

For me, the differences were pretty clear. What I find interesting is that the reasons I liked the .8 more than the .5 in Ian's system is precisely because the .8 made his system sound more like what I enjoy about my system, namely, a relaxed, non-fatiguing sound, an ease and flow to the music, convincing dynamics, a sense of palpable presence, and a sense of natural timbre and tone.

As many may remember from reading these forums, Ian has always loved Wilson speakers. He has had his Alexias now for about eight months, with Sofias and Sashas before then. In my opinion, he has had difficulty finding electronics, and specifically amps, which can control and mate well with the Wilsons. To my ears, there was always an inability to control the lower frequencies which resulted in a loose, inarticulate bass, a slightly lack of clarity on complex passages and often a rather strident treble with the occasional glare. Tonally, Ian's system always seemed a bit recessed in the midrange and somewhat emphasized in the frequency extremes. With his Sashas and now Alexias, I have heard amp/preamp combinations from Lamm, Ayre, Doshi, D'Agostino and now Pass Labs. These are arguably all first rate products, but for me, and perhaps there is considerable bias involved regarding Pass Labs, Ian's system benefitted tremendously from the introduction of Pass gear.

His system had reached a high level the last time I was there about eight weeks ago when he had introduced the XA160.5, XP-30 and a few weeks later, the XP25. The midrange had become more fleshed out and the overall tonal balance was more neutral that it had been with all of the other electronics combinations. But there was still a slight looseness to the lower frequencies and an obscuring veil over the sound. His Transparent Audio cables had been configured for the tubed Doshi gear and he had different power cords and a different DAC.

Well, all of that changed last night. The Transparent Ref XL speaker cables and ICs are now reconfigured for his Pass gear, he introduced Shuyata PCs and has a new Playback? DAC (which I know nothing about). The system sounded very good when we started listening to the .5, but once we switched to the .8, the Wilsons were, for the first time in my experience, really happy with the amplifiers. Here is how I would summarize the difference between the .8 and the .5:

1. Lower noise
2. Greater dynamics
3. Better control of lower frequencies
4. Increased clarity
5. Smoother, sweater sound

I don't pretend to really understand how or why I heard these differences, but I think it has a lot to do with the lowering of noise. My theory is that at this point in the evolution of top tier gear, the manufacturers have solved lots of the issues involving distortion, bias, and clean power delivery. The next frontier in my view is the lowering of noise. With a lower noise floor, one hears more detail, better clarity, greater dynamics, all the things which I associate with live classical music in a great hall.

The two LPs which really clarified my opinion of these amps are the Sheffield Drum Track and Vivaldi's Four Seasons: Winter. I had never heard in Ian's system before the explosive dynamics and tight control of kickdrum thwacks and snare drum strikes and cymbals as I heard last night. One member of our group is in fact a drummer, and he heard more nuance between the different drums, perhaps preferring the .5 in some of the ranges.

In fact, Drum Track LP, one of my acid tests for a system's quality, always sounded kind of soft, dull and boring in Ian's system before. (Sorry Ian) But last night, it was incredible, and improved even more with our later introduction of Stillpoints under his speakers. More about that later in another thread. I had thought that the soft rendition of the Drum Track in Ian's system had been a result of the rather long rubber belt stretching when his cartridge hit a massive transient in the LP. But last night's experience shattered that theory. It was the amps (and perhaps the cables and PCs also) all along and the earlier versions being unable to control what is clearly a very difficult load at low impedances in the Alexia speaker. All of those other great amps, including the 160.5 could not handle the speaker load. Surprisingly, the explosive dynamics and tight control, and even the crisp clear transients of the cymbals now resembles what I hear from the sealed enclosures and easier load of my Mini 2s with my XA160.5.

The massed strings in the Vivaldi had a clarity and truth of timbre that I had not heard through the Wilsons before either. Sound was more open and clean than it was with the .5s and they sounded sweeter. The soundstage seemed slightly bigger and deeper with better defined edges. This overall clarity really went a long way to making it sound much more like the real thing at my reference hall, the BSO and to what I'm used to hearing in my own, mini monitor based system, which is known for clarity.

One area in which the system did not do as well though, is with imaging and scale. The images were a bit diffuse and often larger than life. The sound was slightly bigger than with the .5 which was welcome on jazz and classical, but individual instrumental images were a bit too large. I think this is more a matter of speaker fine tuning than the amps though and it was recording dependent, so it's not too big a deal. I think Ian could work on the speaker placement slightly over time to improve the imaging.

There is no question that for my taste, Ian's Alexias and system in general have never sounded better than with the Pass gear, either the .5 or the .8. I don't know how the .8 would sound in my system, because the attributes that I heard last night in Ian's system really remind me about what I already hear in my own system with the .5. So without more exposure to the .8, I can't be sure if they are better in an absolute sense, but last night, boy did they sound great in Ian's system. It is the best I have ever heard his system sound. The XA.8 is a real achievement and I think they will be a popular line for Pass.

Congratulations Ian.
 

Frank750

VIP/Donor
Jul 8, 2011
821
1
928
Great report Peter!

IMO the imaging and scale from the .8 will get better with time. My Xs amps took a good 300 hours to fully break in. Pass says a lot less and Ian may think they've stabilized after a week but I doubt it. I will say, I haven't heard the .8 though.
 

MadFloyd

Member Sponsor
May 30, 2010
3,080
775
1,700
Mass
What a great, articulate write up, Peter - thanks for making the trip and sharing your thoughts.

Frank, you're probably right that the amps will break-in further. They sounded like mud for the first couple days and started to open up on day 3 and I just went by past recommendations by Mark Sammut of Reno Hi-fi to wait 5 days before critically listening. It's hard for me to tell if they've truly stabilized because my ears aren't consistent (annoying sinus/eustachion tube issues).
 

LL21

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2010
14,430
2,518
1,448
Great review Peter, and congrats to MadFloyd on what appears to be a great move. Sometimes, changing one major component creates massive upheaval in the system...and you have to maintain real conviction that the first major change was the right one...but it can become quite unnerving when the system is struggling to adapt to the change. And yes, sometimes, the one changes triggers a waterfall of other changes/upgrades. However, when you get back to a stable system again...if done right, it IS at a much higher level...and the best part of that is when you listen to a CD you have owned for years but perhaps have not listened to in several months. THAT is when you say...wow, this system has come a LONG way...very satisfying.

Sounds like according to Peter, MadFloyd is well along this path and perhaps already there. Nice.

will be interested to hear Peter's thoughts on the Stillpoints being placed underneath...particularly in light of his own experiences with the Ultra 5s at home which were not successful.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,669
10,942
3,515
USA
Great review Peter, and congrats to MadFloyd on what appears to be a great move. Sometimes, changing one major component creates massive upheaval in the system...and you have to maintain real conviction that the first major change was the right one...but it can become quite unnerving when the system is struggling to adapt to the change. And yes, sometimes, the one changes triggers a waterfall of other changes/upgrades. However, when you get back to a stable system again...if done right, it IS at a much higher level...and the best part of that is when you listen to a CD you have owned for years but perhaps have not listened to in several months. THAT is when you say...wow, this system has come a LONG way...very satisfying.

Sounds like according to Peter, MadFloyd is well along this path and perhaps already there. Nice.

will be interested to hear Peter's thoughts on the Stillpoints being placed underneath...particularly in light of his own experiences with the Ultra 5s at home which were not successful.

Thanks LL21. Yes, Ian's system has come a long way. With the reconfigured cables, new power cords and settling on Pass electronics, I think his system is set for a while. It will take some getting used to and perhaps some minor speaker position changes, but it sounds great now. For me the revelation was the sound of that Drum Track LP. His system could never reproduce that before.

The Stillpoints impression is up in the other thread. They helped too, but not as much as the Pass .8 amp did, IMO.
 

LL21

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2010
14,430
2,518
1,448
Thanks LL21. Yes, Ian's system has come a long way. With the reconfigured cables, new power cords and settling on Pass electronics, I think his system is set for a while. It will take some getting used to and perhaps some minor speaker position changes, but it sounds great now. For me the revelation was the sound of that Drum Track LP. His system could never reproduce that before.

The Stillpoints impression is up in the other thread. They helped too, but not as much as the Pass .8 amp did, IMO.

Yes, thanks...just read it. I very much respect how you have commented positively on Ultra 5s in Ian's system and been more critical in your own...a very balanced presentation of the Ultra 5s in your own experience.
 

aljordan

Well-Known Member
Jan 13, 2012
20
1
908
Southern Maine, USA
www.alanjordan.org
Hello,

I was one of the people at Ian's house comparing the 160.5 to the 160.8, so I will briefly share my impressions here as well.

In my estimation, the low and mid-bass region is where these two amps differ the most, at least with Ian's Wilson speakers. I was quite surprised by the degree of additional bass control presented by the .8 amps. For instance, one track we listened to features a standup bass. The presentation via the .5 amps made it sound more like an electric bass, while the .8 gave it a much more balanced presentation through the range of the instrument, and allowed the dynamic play of the pluck and fingering to shine through far more.

I thought the designers succeeded very well in offering more bass control with little compromise in the higher frequency ranges, but obviously, if you tighten up the control of certain frequencies, the presentation will be a bit drier on some recordings. This was the basis for me being the dissenter Peter mentioned after listening to the first two analog tracks. During the Four Seasons track, the drier presentation of a recording that does not already have much low frequency information resulted in a slight loss of ambiance and richness. The jazz track was an older recording, most likely made with peaky mics so I am not really comfortable using it for comparative notes, but the recording really grooves well in places. This was one example of a recording where I thought the .5 offered more midrange liquidity and retrieval of midrange detail than the .8. The percussion instruments in particular sounded more realistic to me via the .5, and I thought the saxophone sounded more realistic as well via the .5. I am a drummer, and my son plays the saxophone, so this is probably why I keyed into the sound of these instruments. I will note that I was not sitting in the sweet spot when we compared these two tracks. Maybe my impressions would have been different in the sweet spot.

Please note that the above tracks were the only time I preferred the .5 to the .8. When we switched to digital via the Playback Designs DAC, and listened to more modern recordings as well, I pretty much universally preferred the added bass control of the .8 amps. The music was warm and full, yet well controlled and detail retrieval was excellent. The music sounded rich and luscious.

With Ian's speakers and his Playback Designs DAC, I would unhesitatingly choose the .8 over the .5. If he had a leaner sounding DAC, maybe the choice would be tougher to make. I would also like to try the two amplifiers on speakers that did not present as difficult a load in the low frequencies, as the midrange of the .5 might swing the balance where bass grip is not needed.

Alan
 

LL21

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2010
14,430
2,518
1,448
Great read...thanks for taking the time to post. I really like the Alexias when set up well. And in a way, that is one of the things that can really backfire about Wilsons...with all the variables, set em up wrong...and trouble. But get em right, and it intriguing to see how many people who come in with various preconceived notions are surprised.

I was just reading Audio Federation...those gents are seriously into high-end, and I suppose everyone has their own personal preferences...they are certainly happy to express their own. I was thus very intrigued to read their highly complementary comments about their own experiments with the Alexandria 2 and XLF...and this is without changing resistors or adjusting the module tilt...which (imho) is necessary to get the most out of the Wilsons.

The only difference in this case is that, unlike the X2 and XLF which are relatively easier to drive, I think the Alexia has some peculiarities in power requirements which the 0.8 have clearly highlighted well.

Thanks again for posting...and hope Ian's quiet on this post because he is busy listening to album after album...after album...;)
 

MadFloyd

Member Sponsor
May 30, 2010
3,080
775
1,700
Mass
Well my thoughts aren't as positive, unfortunately. The jury is still out on these amps. I've been hesitant to post because I'm still trying to make sense of what I'm hearing.

To me, I hear a 'smiley face' EQ curve with these amps. The midrange, usually one of Pass' best attributes is recessed. I get listening fatigue after about 30 minutes.

In all fairness, I need to say that I suffer from an often-blocked eustachian tube that results in over-blown bass and general 'dull hearing' which prevents me from listening on many occasions. That said, today was pretty clear and I learned some things. I also should say that during the listening session Friday night, I was never in the sweet spot - I sat on the side the entire time in a bass node.

The .8's have very deep bass. I'm going to guess around 30 hz or so. My main perception when listening is that I have my REL subs set too high. The room physically shakes, even when playing standup bass. Not only is this annoying to me, but it interferes with articulation and texture of the bass. The real problem here is that my REL subs aren't hooked up; they aren't even in the room - they are downstairs.

I read a post from a dealer who described the promised sound of the .8's as 'lit up in the extremes' and I think this is a good description. This could really be helpful for folks who could benefit from some emphasis at the frequency extremes. With my Wilson Alexias, I don't think I need that so much. The weird thing is that when I switch back to the .5's they can sound midrange-y by comparison.

What has really made this amp comparison difficult for me is that I switched to Shunyata power cords about a week earlier. When I first installed Shunyata Alpha HC on my .5 amps, I thought I had died and gone to heaven. I've never heard such deep taut bass in my system before. Any 'mud' that I had was gone and it was the first time that I ever experienced the often described sensation of the front wall disappearing and the soundstage becoming deeper than the physical boundaries. Unfortunately that didn't last - as the power cords broke in, the sound thickened in ways that were detrimental to the overall presentation. These power cords now make the bass sound so thick that the bass is texture-less. If I switch back to my MIT power cords, it thins out and is much more articulate. In all fairness, I voiced the speakers with the MIT power cords and not the Shunyatas so maybe that's the reason. If was filthy rich, I'd buy thousands of Shunyata power cords and replace them after a week.

Going back to the amps: Female vocals sound too thin and shouty for my tastes with the .8's. Again, I haven't attempted to re-voice the speakers and the amps could still be breaking in, but I have to mention this. The sound can put me 'on edge' quickly as it sounds a bit hard and glassy.

The bottom line is I don't know what I think of these new amps just yet. I do think there is better bass control and speed, but at a cost.
 

zztop7

Member Sponsor
Dec 12, 2012
750
3
0
Edmonds, WA
In all fairness, I voiced the speakers with the MIT power cords and not the Shunyatas so maybe that's the reason. If was filthy rich, I'd buy thousands of Shunyata power cords and replace them after a week.

Have you considered trying some 8 or 10 gauge generic [low $] power cords?

zz.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing