Comparison: Pocket Reference VS. XP-7 ?

Jun 9, 2004 at 4:17 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 36

utdeep

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 15, 2001
Posts
1,873
Likes
770
Hey y'all,
I've tried searching for a comparison between the XP-7 and the Pocket Reference but I could not find one. Considering they are close in cost (PR Premium), I was wondering how they compare with each other.
I would expect the XP-7 to be better, but I'm not certain. The Pocket Reference is supposed to have a PPA like design but not identical, which I assume means it is slightly below PPA performance. The XP-7 is supposed to be in the same league as a PPA, therefore must be slightly better than the PR.
Is my logic faulty? Has anyone compared them?
If you could get either at the same price ($400), which one would you go for?
Please take the super duel and the SR-71 out of the equation.

I'm going to be using the UE5c if that helps any although I'm guessing not many people have used either amp with one.

I apologize for forgetting to put a question mark in the title before posting. If the mods could change this, please do. Otherwise, I may be forced to make a real comparison between the amps to justify the thread
eek.gif
 
Jun 9, 2004 at 5:01 PM Post #2 of 36
I did that comparison (maxed-out PR vs. XP-7), and I came to the conclusion that the maxed-out PR sounds better. You can find a lot of info in my thread "Larocco Pocket Reference sounds great!", for which I am unable to provide a link because the search function appears to be disabled again. The only other (published) comparison I am aware of was done by lindrone around the same time, and he described the (non-maxed-out) PR as superior to and more exciting than the XP-7.

The current production version of the PR comes with an adjusted gain and improved Opamps, which changes are expected to improve its performance even more. I will report once I have received mine (in exchange for the early production one that I have now and that was already much better than the XP-7).

The PR has some practical advantages such as no need to buy $200 PSU, comes with reachargeable batteries that can be recharged inside the amp, bass boost (not that you need one), etc.

It's the better choice from many perspectives.

In my view, the (maxed-out) Larocco Pocket Reference is the amp that the RA-1 should have been and the XP-7 could have been.

I have no experience with UE5Cs.
 
Jun 9, 2004 at 5:14 PM Post #4 of 36
i have not heard the xp7 so take my thoughts with a grain of salt...i listened to my maxed out PR for a couple of days before returning it to larry for some repairs - the volume pot was faulty and the gain was a bit too high. when i was able to find a good volume level, the sound was very very nice. the bass doesn't seem as big as it is from the ra1, but much tighter (with grado rs1). i only use the bass boost with the er4s.

the PR, though not in the same league as super duel in terms of size, is much more compact than the xp7 so is more transportable.

the wait for a PR is long, though, so that may play a factor in your choice as well...
 
Jun 9, 2004 at 5:43 PM Post #5 of 36
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sugano-san
The current production version of the PR comes with an adjusted gain and improved Opamps.


The following quote (from Larry) is taken from the Larocco forum:

"After two weeks I have been listening to the PR with the AD8066 Opamp. I can honestly say I feel it is a definite improvement in sound over the AD8610. Everything the PR does well is refined and strengthened with a drop in brightness. The Pocket was counting on the AD8610 to balance with the warm rolled off BUF634 buffer. The 8066 seems to work synergistically with the 634 and delivers that great bass and warmth without a bump in brightness."
 
Jun 9, 2004 at 6:37 PM Post #6 of 36
Interesting reading that thread. Thanks for posting it!
It's the op amp rolling thing that confuses me. It seems the comparisons to the XP-7 were done with the ad8610 instead of the ad797 that everyone raves about. Part of the post also discuss opamp rolling with the PR (can that be done by end user?) and a change in final opamp from ad8610 to AD8066. So what does this all mean? Bobjew used an ad797/ad825 combo in his XP-7 and was chastised for it in another thread.
This is what I can gather so far.

XP-7 with AD8610 < PR with AD8610
XP-7 with AD8610 < XP-7 with AD797 (which sounds close to HR-2)
PR with AD8610 < PR with AD8066 (new opamp)
XP-7 with AD797 ? PR with AD8610
XP-7 with AD797 ? PR with AD8066

confused.gif
 
Jun 9, 2004 at 11:20 PM Post #7 of 36
Quote:

Originally Posted by utdeep
Interesting reading that thread. Thanks for posting it!
It's the op amp rolling thing that confuses me. It seems the comparisons to the XP-7 were done with the ad8610 instead of the ad797 that everyone raves about. Part of the post also discuss opamp rolling with the PR (can that be done by end user?) and a change in final opamp from ad8610 to AD8066. So what does this all mean? Bobjew used an ad797/ad825 combo in his XP-7 and was chastised for it in another thread.
This is what I can gather so far.

XP-7 with AD8610 < PR with AD8610
XP-7 with AD8610 < XP-7 with AD797 (which sounds close to HR-2)
PR with AD8610 < PR with AD8066 (new opamp)
XP-7 with AD797 ? PR with AD8610
XP-7 with AD797 ? PR with AD8066

confused.gif



You are right in saying that many XP-7s are equipped with 797s. denis' XP-7 was equipped with the 8610s when I did the comparison, which was good because my PR had the same chips installed and I was able to compare amp designs, not opamps.

However, denis had a spare pair of 797s, which I briefly installed, but preferred the 8610s for their broader bandwidth and clarity. Still not as good as the PR with the same chips. To me, the answer to your question "XP-7 with AD797 ? PR with AD8610" is therefore "<".

The 8065 (mono)/8066 (stereo) opamps are latest-generation, ultra-fast, broad bandwidth opamps that have received a lot of praise, but I cannot tell you so much about their specs because I am not a technician. What I do know is that back in January/February when I ordered my PR, one of my questions to Larry was whether the PR would also run with that chip. He never replied; apparently he was still convinced of the superiority of the 8610. As we know now, he has revised his position.

I would therefore expect that the answer to your question "XP-7 with AD797 ? PR with AD8066" will be "<" as well, but that remains to be seen. Mathematically it would follow from (i) XP-7 with AD797 < PR with AD8610 in conjunction with (ii) PR with AD8610 < PR with AD8066.

Both amps allow opamp rolling by the user. The XP-7 has two sockets, the PR has one. The XP-7 needs two mono chips, the PR may accept two mono chips (on the same brown dog adapter) or one stereo chip.

The 797's popularity may be due to the fact that it sounds a little softer and rolled off at the frequency extremes. Unfortunately it also sounds more closed in and much less spacious than the 8610, which -- on the other hand -- may expose a certain tendency towards brightness.

I am really looking forward to the 8066, which promises a dynamic and transparent, yet smooth sound without the need for such compromises.
 
Jun 12, 2004 at 12:45 PM Post #8 of 36
utdeep:

IMO, the PR I heard (Lindrone's) sounded thin and lacking in Bass. The whole sound seemed canted towards the treble. I prefer the XP-7's richer, darker and fuller presentation especially with the ad8610 and ad797 opamp combination. No one has still yet to give a good or rational reason as to why it is bad to combine opamps in the XP-7 or why this would sound bad. I think its just a case of closed minds encased in status quo.
 
Jun 12, 2004 at 12:53 PM Post #9 of 36
Quote:

Originally Posted by bobjew
No one has still yet to give a good or rational reason as to why it is bad to combine opamps in the XP-7 or why this would sound bad. I think its just a case of closed minds encased in status quo.


Uhm, when you use a different opamp in the left/right channels, what you essentially now have is a different amplifier for each channel...there are many reasons why this is a bad idea, both in sound and engineering. If you are trying to compensate for a hearing deficiency in one ear (such as high freq hearing loss), get an equalizer or some device with separate tone controls for each channel.
 
Jun 12, 2004 at 1:08 PM Post #10 of 36
I owned Lindrone's PR and an xp-7 at the same time. I had to decide which one to keep so I did an unscientific a/b comparison of the two using some of the music I enjoy including Miles Davis, Charlie Hunter, Jon Scofield and I think some Grateful Dead. I did not make notes, this was purely for me to pick between the two amps. I did this with both my hd650 and E5's. In the end I kept the xp-7. The xp-7 seemed to be better able to drive the senns. I enjoyed the bass better with the xp-7. There just seemed to be more of it. I wish I could give a better description of the sound differences, I just liked the sound better on the xp-7. Both are built like tanks. I must say, that in the end while I kept the xp-7, the pr is a nice amp. You do not need a power supply for the xp-7. The consensus seems to be that there is no difference between the sound of the xp-7 with or without an external power supply. I like using batteries in the xp-7. The last a long time and are easily replaced.
 
Jun 12, 2004 at 1:52 PM Post #11 of 36
thank you! now both camps are out in full force on this thread!
I had assumed from the earlier messages that the PR waxxed the XP-7 in every single way, and now I'm confused again.
smily_headphones1.gif

I will have the XP-7 in a few days and possibly a maxed out PR by next month. I'm glad that it's be worth my time to check out both.
 
Jun 12, 2004 at 2:32 PM Post #12 of 36
Quote:

Originally Posted by utdeep
thank you! now both camps are out in full force on this thread!
I had assumed from the earlier messages that the PR waxxed the XP-7 in every single way, and now I'm confused again.
smily_headphones1.gif

I will have the XP-7 in a few days and possibly a maxed out PR by next month. I'm glad that it's be worth my time to check out both.



Having listened to the XP-7 and a few other amps (not the PR BTW) I would say that no amp really "waxes" the XP-7. You may find that it suits your tastes or that the PR is more to your liking but there are no glaring deficiencies; the differences between amps in the same class are subtle.

I guess what I have a problem with is turning every comparison into some sort of competition when in the end it is just user preference. If an amp has a deficiency or real strength list it but to say that amp x blows amp y out of the water tells the reader nothing.
 
Jun 12, 2004 at 2:53 PM Post #13 of 36
It is obviously a matter of opinion on which is better. However, I can't imagine any other amp, in the same price range, being that much better than the xp-7. It's next test will be a comparison with my Eddie Current hd300, if it ever arrives. One or the other must go. After the pr comparison I did a similar comparison with the Perreaux sxh-1 and the Perreaux has been sent to a new home.
 
Jun 12, 2004 at 3:14 PM Post #14 of 36
Quote:

Originally Posted by bobjew
utdeep:
No one has still yet to give a good or rational reason as to why it is bad to combine opamps in the XP-7 or why this would sound bad.



I came across a thread discussing this issue recently, so it's still fresh in mind. The following is a quote from Ray:

Quote:

... You have to choose which op-amps to use my friend, Having one channel with AD825 op-amp which has an input noise of 11 nano & having AD797 op-amp with .95 nano volt input noise in the other channel is not right my friend. One channel will hiss due to the input noise of the op-amp when used with sensetive cans.
Nothing will hurt the amp but I would not do it, & I think you should go into history as the very first person who had two different op-amps in the left Channel comparing to the right.
Cheers.
Ray samuels


 
Jun 12, 2004 at 3:59 PM Post #15 of 36
Quote:

Originally Posted by bobjew
utdeep:

IMO, the PR I heard (Lindrone's) sounded thin and lacking in Bass. The whole sound seemed canted towards the treble. I prefer the XP-7's richer, darker and fuller presentation especially with the ad8610 and ad797 opamp combination. No one has still yet to give a good or rational reason as to why it is bad to combine opamps in the XP-7 or why this would sound bad. I think its just a case of closed minds encased in status quo.



IMO if it sounds good to you and it makes you happy there is nothing wrong with two different op amps. After all when you are listening with headphones who is there to please but yourself?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top