Anyone auditioned Pass Labs XP-30 preamp?

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.

Hi Peter: I don't have personal experience with these linestages as I haven't listened to the XP-30 and I don't do vinyl, but this is what Pass told me about the XP-30. It was originally a prototype for their inhouse needs of chaining amplifiers with different gains to a single preamp. (They didn't say what for, but it might have to do with the new Xs amps.) As a byproduct of this design requirement, they managed to get the noise to an extremely low level; the noise of the new volume control even exceeds the resolution of their test instruments. In order to ensure that this level of performance is always available (and not masked by distortions / noise brought about by fluctuations in AC quality), they gave the XP-30 a massive power supply and extensive voltage regulation that would have been considered very overengineered just a few years ago.

Petrushka, That is indeed very interesting and helps to explain its high performance. I had a friend over tonight to do some more listening to the XP-30. He brought over some of his favorite LPs and was very impressed with the improvement over my XP-20. He knows my system well. One of the topics we discussed is the polemic that audio reviewers espouse, namely that a component usually falls into one of two camps: the accurate (read analytical, hyper detailed and often sterile) or the musical (read euphonic, warm, beautiful).

My friend and I have always been puzzled with these seemingly opposed camps. To us, something that sounds accurate, ie. like real music, is by definition "Musical" with a capital "M". It is highly resolving and beautiful at the same time. The XP-30 is an example of a component that does just that. There is such a level of resolution, lack of distortion and great detail, and dare I say "accuracy", that it is the most "(M)usical" pre amp that I, and my friend, have heard.

It was a most memorable evening.