P5 or P10
 

Any opinions as to whether p10 or p5 is more appropriate for my system, which consists of two McIntosh MC501 Amps and a McIntosh C48 preamp?? I read a statement from the CEO of PS Audio that the p10 sounds much better than the p5. Anyone have a chance to perform an apples to apples comparison of the two? Would the p10 be overkill or worth the extra money? Thanks in advance.

p10, not p1. Sorry for the typo in the title. I can't figure out how to edit the title......

I can ;)

Thank you!!

P10
 

Lots of capacity for future growth, no under shot in current system. P10.

bvlaw.......I think you would be safer in the long run to install the PS Audio P10 simply because of its higher current delivery capability. I believe the P5 will operate your sound system but there could be a possibility where some current limiting may come into play with the MC501's.

At one point after I first received my first PS Audio Power Plant Premier, the older brother of the P10, I powered my two MC501's with it along with the preamp and sources. The MC501's maximum current draw is 6.6 A at 120 volts, so the pair equals 13.2 A max current. The current draw for the remaining gear I owned at the time, a C1000C/P, MS750, MCD500, MR85, and Sonos ZP90 was 2 A. Powering everything, including the two MC501's would equal a maximum current draw of 15.2 amps, well within a 20 A dedicated circuit's ability to deliver current that the PPP was plugged into, although this equals 1824 watts which exceeds the PPP's 1200 watts maximum sustained output. Maximum load demand for this sound system was generally much less than that because the amplifiers were rarely pushed to anywhere near maximum current demand, and it certainly would not be sustained. I tested the MC501 using an amp meter and discovered that with audio peaks at 300 watts output the MC501's current demand was peaking at 3.5 A. Multiply that times two for both amplifiers and I had a 7 A current demand for both amplifiers peaking 300 watts. That is well above my typical listening level. So, take the 7 A current reading for the pair of MC501's, add the preamplifier and source loads of 2 A, and I only needed 9 A to satisfy the current demands of the entire system's components, including both amps. This 9 A current draw equals 1080 watts, which was well within the 1200 watts continuous output capability of the PS Audio Power Plant Premier. I kept the 501's on the single PPP until I decided to purchase a second PPP just for the amps. That way I was able to keep both amps on a separate dedicated 20 amp circuit and the preamplifier and source components on their 20 amp dedicated circuit. Both the PPP and the P10 have the same 1200 watt continuous load rating. The P5 has a 1000 watt maximum continuous load rating.

Judging from the gear you said will be powered by the newer PS Audio AC regenerator, I suspect the P5 can and will work, but I still recommend the P10. Power reserve is a good thing, even in an AC regenerator.

I agree, the P10 will run cooler, longer, and sound better with all your gear vs a single P5

Remember, there is very special pricing for AA Subscribers. :yes:

bvlaw.......Here are the actual specifications for the PS Audio P5 and P10 AC regenerators.


P5 Specs:

Dimensions 17” W x 14” D x 4” H
Weight 37 lbs.
Nominal Input Voltage 95-145 (US) 200-285 VAC (Europe/Asia)
Maximum Continuous Load 1000VA (US) 1500VA (Europe/Asia)
Maximum Peak Load 1200VA (US) 1800VA (Europe/Asia)
Dynamic Power Delivery 0.5 second> 3600VA 9US) 5000VA (Eur./Asia)
Voltage Regulation +/- 0.5V (US) 1Vac (Europe/Asia)
Output Distortion Input 220-240VAC 1200VA Resistive Load <0.9%
Output Distortion 230V 240VAC 1200VA Reactive Load <0.9%
Output Distortion Input 110-130VAC 1200VA Resistive Load <0.5%
Output Distortion Input 110-130VAC 12000VA Reactive Load <0.5%
Output Impedance <0.0015 Ohm
Noise Reduction (all zones) 100KHz-2MHz >80dB
Efficiency @ 1200VA Resistive Load > 85% Reactive Load > 85%
Input Frequency 45-56Hz
Under Voltage Limit Continuous= -10% of setting, 15 Sec Duration= -15% of setting
Over Voltage Limit Continuous= 5% of setting, 15 Sec Duration= 10% of setting
Protection Modes L-N, L-G, N-G
Energy Dissipation 2440J (US) 3670J (Europe/Asia)
Peak Current Surge 144,000A (US) 84,000A (Europe/Asia)
Max Surge 6,000 Volts
Clamp Level 330V (US) 800V (Europe/Asia)
Telco Protection 320 Joules 395 volts
Coax Insertion loss <1dB



P10 Specs:

Dimensions 17” W x 14” D x 8.5” H
Weight 73 lbs.
Nominal Input Voltage 95-145 (US) 200-285 VAC (Europe/Asia
Maximum Continuous Load 1200VA (US) 1800VA (Europe/Asia)
Maximum Peak Load 1500VA (US) 2000VA (Europe/Asia)
Dynamic Power Delivery 0.5 second> 3600VA (US) 5000VA (Eur./Asia)
Voltage Regulation +/- 0.5V (US) 1Vac (Europe/Asia)
Output Distortion Input 220-240VAC 1200VA Resistive Load <0.9%
Output Distortion 230V 240VAC 1200VA Reactive Load <0.9%
Output Distortion Input 110-130VAC 1200VA Resistive Load <0.5%
Output Distortion Input 110-130VAC 12000VA Reactive Load <0.5%
Output Impedance <0.0015 Ohm
Noise Reduction (all zones) 100KHz-2MHz >80dB
Efficiency @ 1200VA Resistive Load > 85% Reactive Load > 85%
Input Frequency 45-56Hz
Under Voltage Limit Continuous= -10% of setting 15 Sec Duration= -15% of setting
Over Voltage Limit Continuous= 5% of setting 15 Sec Duration= 10% of setting
Protection Modes L-N, L-G, N-G
Energy Dissipation 2440J (US) 3670J (Europe/Asia)
Peak Current Surge 144,000A (US) 84,000A (Europe/Asia)
Max Surge 6,000 Volts
Clamp Level 330V (US) 800V (Europe/Asia)
Telco Protection 320 Joules 395 volts
Coax Insertion loss <1dB
DC Trigger configured Tip Positive
DC Trigger Voltage 5-15 volts dc

Jdandy- thank you so much for the detailed responses. You are truly an invaluable asset to this forum. I appreciate your helping me to understand the various considerations in choosing the appropriate unit for my specific equipment.

Masterlu- I will be in touch with you soon (probably in about a month) when I am ready to make a purchase.

Thanks again.

bvlaw.......Thank you for the kind words. It was my pleasure to be able to help you make the best decision.

When in doubt, just add more 20 amp outlets. :naughty:

Tested both in last 2 months.

P5 is very good.
P10 is very, very good (no fan is a bonus).

Whatever one you buy, just having an AC regenerator in the system is a truly remarkable improvement.

Power wise, the P5 will handle your requirements perfectly.
But its true the P10 does make a system sound that extra bit better (has more body to the sound), mine sits at about 18% so its not having to work hard heat wise.

In the Euro and Australian versions the P5 only has 4 outputs, but the P10 has 9 as the case is so big. 4 was not enough for me.

As the price difference where I live was minimal I opted for the P10.

Anthony

Anthony- thanks for the advice. I was hoping to hear from people who have had the opportunity to compare both units.

Paul's comment.
 

Also Paul has said many times in various forums the P10 sounds best.
Dave

Dave.......Would you expect Paul McGowan to say anything else? . :rolleyes:

I think at some point $$$$ permitting I am going to replace at least one of my PPPs with a P10, but I have a new TV, maybe a new PS Audio Dac on the list in front of it. For now my PPPs have been very good units:)

I think that PS Audio make very good gear, you are going to be very happy with your choice for sure!

I wanted to jump in and revive this thread as I have debated getting a P5 or P10.

I called Mcintosh to ask specifically if it is necessary to connect my MC402 to a power regenerator (necessitating a P10). Or if it is better to connect the MCAmps to the wall in light of their autoformers, which would make the P5 the obvious choice for front end components only.

I was surprised at Chuck Hinton from Mcintosh tell me that he didn't advise I use ANY power regeneration.

He said in his experience, they altered the sound in an unnatural way.

He also said they had a few units in for repair with blown fuses, due to being connected to power regenerators.

I was very surprised to hear this and was curious if any other folks with P5's or P10's and Mcintosh combos.

I am still interested in hearing what this could do in my system, but I'll admit I'm now a bit nervous after talking to Chuck at Mcintosh.

Glad to provide user feedback on this:
The P10 has been one of the most significant upgrades I've ever made.
No lag time in note response, fast, immediate, its glorious.
Zero issues on 4 McIntosh components that are connected (or any other brands).
Been using for 14 months. Highly recommended.

Anthony

Chuck always says "don't use any power conditioner"... :rolleyes: unless of course you are using their MPC1500.

I have no less than 30 Mac amps all connected thru PS Audio power regenerators for the last 15+ years; zero issues. :)

Thanks for the feedback.

Ok, one more question.

Those that have added the P10 (or I suppose P5) to the chain, how much improvement did you hear in sound.

For example, when I added the C2300 to my system, I'd say things sounded at least 15-20% better.

When I demoed the MEN220, there was an obvious 20% improvement in sound.

Is the P10 added to the chain more subtle in terms of sound quality improvement? Or is is pretty dramatic?

What did you hear? What should I expect?

Adding clean power results in significant improvements, but not as dramatic as a quality stand that appropriately manages vibrations. Or stillpoints.
Going from P5 to P10 on my amplifiers was more subtle than going from nothing to P5. However, I am still using one P5 for the non-amplifier components. :scratch2:

Thanks Tim.

If you had to put a % improvement number from when you went from nothing to the P5, what would you say? 3% better overall sound? 10%? etc.

To all who have the P10, what kind of "burn-in" if any did you experience?

I took the plunge and bought a P10 and my initial impression wasn't that good.

I've been running it day and night hoping things will improve with burn-in.

It's hard to find a bad review of the P10, so I'm not quite ready to throw in the towel just yet.

Thoughts?

My view is that it provides clean power and a measure of protection to my equipment. While I can't say I heard any improvement in the sound and certainly no 'burn in' effect, I am pleased to know it's there doing what it does.

Do I need it? Probably not but then I wouldnt have the surge protection it provides. Expensive insurance perhaps.

Good feedback.

I'm considering keeping the P10 from an insurance standpoint, but I was really hoping to "hear" improvements as well.

The reviews seem to almost universally praise the improved sound. With many folks saying let it burn in for up to 300 hours to hear all the improvements.

I'm not sure if it is timing from burn in, or if I tried the Ayre "Irrational But Efficacious" CD, but i swear the bass has increased in my system 2x. I had to check a couple of times to make sure my subs were turned off.

Also, you should take into account the various power sine wave options that the P5 and P10 are well known for. If you view the input
power and THD readings, you will notice that their are some improvements in the output of the measured power. As far as break in, I would believe that your other components may have more of an influence on sound than the P10, per se. If you have tube equipment I would say this is more so than solid state devices as the tubes burn in through the initial burn in, or return to an acceptable operation after a sustained storage period or non use.

My equipment has been in storage for 6 months, after firing up everything for the first time, it sounded terrible. After an hour or so, it sounded better. An A/B demo of a video demonstrates this. So, give it a chance and see what happens. Also, damping vibrations does play a large part in mitigating physical harmonic resonance, and the P10 reduces the electrical harmonic
distortion. The sum of the combined parts equals greater gains in sound playback and resolution than one particular solution alone.

Good luck.

I'd love to see your A/B test video if you could post it.