Anyone auditioned Pass Labs XP-30 preamp?

I've been given the opportunity to borrow an XP-30 for a few days. I own an
XP-20 and figured the only way to really know how they differ is to
compare them directly in my system. As Petrushka mentioned, the XP-30
benefits from at least 24 hours of warm up. I've been listening now for five
days and have a sense of how it compares to my XP-20.

First, it is quieter. The noise floor is lower. I only listen to vinyl and the
backgrounds are slightly blacker than with the 20. Of course, this
increases signal to noise, so micro details are more easily heard. Overall
resolution is higher than with the XP-20. But also, there seems to be less
distortion allowing me to listen a bit louder with absolutely no fatigue.
Timbral accuracy is improved and there is slightly more hall information.
I've never heard the cello as played by Starker sound so pure. Tone is
simply beautiful. The definition of instruments in space is also clearer.
Some or all of these improvements may be due to the separate gain chassis
for each channel. The effect is not unlike when I compared an Aleph 5 to a
pair of Aleph 2s. Channel separation increased and crosstalk diminished.

The frequency extremes also seem slightly more extended. The bass is
better and the midrange is a bit fuller with more weight, but this is
balanced by better high frequency extension and detail, so I would not
really describe it as warmer. It still seems well balanced. The increased
clarity and extension is more noticeable in my system than is a shift in
tonal balance. Bass, in particular, seems more articulate, deeper and better
defined than it is with the 20. This reminds me of when I switched from
the SME V to the V-12 arm. The latter sounded more relaxed and
moredetailed at the same time with a better articulated bottom end.

Soundstage width is about the same as with the 20. Depth is
slightly better, but more important is the improved sense of layering and
image location, definition and solidity. The sound is also slightly bigger. It
projects more into the room making the music more present.

These differences are not subtle, but they are clear and definite. At the
same time, they are not huge. I've learned not to expect such things. It is
not so much a case of diminishing returns as it is a case for incremental
and steady improvement. After a certain level, to some of us any
improvement is worth celebrating. The improvement is quite noticeable
and the XP-30 is certainly the best preamp that I've had in my system. I
think the degree to which one thinks the 30 is better than the 20 will be
very dependent on the resolution of his or her system. Whether it is worth
it to upgrade will depend on available rack space and how much of a
difference one is able to hear. Because the 30 is considerably more
expensive than the 20, I will leave the issue of value to everyone to decide
for himself.

In my system, the XP-20 sounds great and I'm extremely happy with it.
Perhaps it was a curse to hear the XP-30, but I could not resist the
opportunity. It is definitely better, as one would expect for the additional
cost. I think that the XP-30 is the best preamp that Wayne has designed. It is
a real achievement and he should be commended.

Great review -- thanks for sharing.

Based on what I've read and my communications with the folks at Pass, it seems that sonically the XP-30 benefits from a new volume control that is very quiet and a massive power supply that makes it quite immune to power line noise and anomalies. Overall, the sound is supposed to be extremely detailed and resolving without sounding harsh.

Back in 2010 I visited Pass' booth at CES. At that time, they hadn't decided if they would top out their line at XP-20. The two-piece XP-20 already edged out the older, 3-piece X0.2 in performance and it wasn't clear if the addition of a third box would bring meaningful benefit. It's interesting that they did finally find a way to improve things. This was how they described the differences to me:

- the XP-15 edged out the Xono slightly; the XP-25 was better than the XP-15 by quite a large margin

- the XP-20 was slighly better than the X0.2; the XP-10 is a touch less resolving than either and had slightly less articulate bass, but it did have a very pleasing, musical balance that some people preferred

i can understand producing a new top-line preamp as a match for the newest amplifiers (cost no object). HOWEVER, i cannot understand with all the latest technological advances why you would need THREE boxes for TWO channels.
there are a number of VERY good preamps out there that have more than adequate isolation-techniques that still are just a single unit.
Pass Labs used to make the one-box Aleph P which was pure class-A and built without regards for cost ($4k) was compared to a passive unit and sounded "slightly" less transparent. anything they make is fine with me because they are absolutely dedicated to great sound, but OTOH i would rather they upgrade the XP-20 to a 20.5 and perhaps generate even more enthusiasm.

Petrushka, Thanks for sharing those comments about the various models. I'm wondering what the bigger improvement would be with the following two choises:

1. Upgrade from the XONO to the XP-25
2. Upgrade from the XP-20 to the XP-30

The XP-25 has the front controls for convenience, but has far fewer settings. The two inputs don't matter to me because I only have one arm/cartridge. The XP 30 is great, but it would be a more expensive upgrade.

French_fries, I owned a used Aleph P and it was great for the money, but the PASS X-1 that replaced it was much better, IMO. And the XP-30 is much better still. It does seem like overkill to have all of these boxes and cables. Consider the XP-25, XP-30 and a pair of the new Xs amps. That's nine (9) boxes with lots of connectors. Imagine the space needed. You could certainly buy a one-box integrated amp with built-in phono circuit instead, but the sound would not be as sweet.

After listening to the XP-30 for a week, the added rack space needed for the three boxes is a small price to pay for the glorious sound. If they could upgrade my XP-20 to a 20.5 which sounds like the 30 for a small fee, yes, that would be fantastic, but I doubt that option will ever be available. Perhaps in a few years there will be a small one box preamp based on the SIT chip which will change the whole game and footprint.

They certainly are "...absolutely dedicated to great sound...."

07-17-12: French_fries
i can understand producing a new top-line preamp as a match for the newest amplifiers (cost no object). HOWEVER, i cannot understand with all the latest technological advances why you would need THREE boxes for TWO channels.
there are a number of VERY good preamps out there that have more than adequate isolation-techniques that still are just a single unit.
Pass Labs used to make the one-box Aleph P which was pure class-A and built without regards for cost ($4k) was compared to a passive unit and sounded "slightly" less transparent. anything they make is fine with me because they are absolutely dedicated to great sound, but OTOH i would rather they upgrade the XP-20 to a 20.5 and perhaps generate even more enthusiasm.
French_fries (Threads | Answers | This Thread)

Consumer demand?

I was speaking with a highly regarded and well known designer, he said market demands have a LARGE influence in his designs and some of the features are just for show. I'm sure most thinks 2 chassis are superior to 1, 3 are superior to 2 ... and also the more chassis, the more you can charge. Some buy to satisfy their egos and not their ears. Like any successful company, you build what the consumer wants.

BTW, I'm not accusing Pass of this practice. As a matter of fact, Nelson Pass is one of the good honest guys in this industry based on personal experiences.