|
Post by jolaca on Jan 17, 2017 13:09:04 GMT -5
Come on pmctexas let us know more about your new MC-700!! ;-))
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Jan 17, 2017 14:55:51 GMT -5
What?!! You 2 have received yet posted no unboxing pics?
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jan 17, 2017 16:30:31 GMT -5
I believe the question is not as simple as "which sounds better" there are other important considerations. The fact is processors have very short lives and as such there is a price point at which it becomes uneconomical to exceed. Emotiva have done a good job in making the XMC-1 upgradable but the fact is the upgrades cost much the same as buying a new MC-700 (especially for those of us with the 25% UFL discount). It's not just price, right now the MC-700 has 3 x 4k HDMI video inputs that support 4k UHD HDR video and HDCP 2.2. That's not unusual, I had my UMC-200 for two and half years before the XMC-1 became available, so it "sounded better" then the XMC-1 because there wasn't one. The product development cycle, due to higher selling numbers, is always going to be faster for the lower priced processor and as a result it's going to leap frog the higher priced processor for some period of time. Then the higher priced processor will have "superior features" until the lower priced processor leap frogs it again. So over 10/15/20 years the lower priced processor provides "superior features" whilst costing substantially less. The bonus is having a hand me down processor to use in other rooms, for the kids etc.
Based on the UMC-1 and the UMC-200 I have no doubt that the MC-700 will sound really good, better than AVR's costing 4 or 5 times as much, hence sensation value for money. Off course the XMC-1 will sound better, but how much better? Almost certainly not in proportion to its higher price, the law off diminishing returns applies to audio equipment and very much to processors. As a result my suggestion is to look at the big picture, the whole life of the processor/processors, sound quality on its own is too simple a measure.
Cheers Gary
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Jan 17, 2017 17:15:05 GMT -5
I believe the question is not as simple as "which sounds better" there are other important considerations. The fact is processors have very short lives and as such there is a price point at which it becomes uneconomical to exceed. Emotiva have done a good job in making the XMC-1 upgradable but the fact is the upgrades cost much the same as buying a new MC-700 (especially for those of us with the 25% UFL discount). It's not just price, right now the MC-700 has 3 x 4k HDMI video inputs that support 4k UHD HDR video and HDCP 2.2. That's not unusual, I had my UMC-200 for two and half years before the XMC-1 became available, so it "sounded better" then the XMC-1 because there wasn't one. The product development cycle, due to higher selling numbers, is always going to be faster for the lower priced processor and as a result it's going to leap frog the higher priced processor for some period of time. Then the higher priced processor will have "superior features" until the lower priced processor leap frogs it again. So over 10/15/20 years the lower priced processor provides "superior features" whilst costing substantially less. The bonus is having a hand me down processor to use in other rooms, for the kids etc. Based on the UMC-1 and the UMC-200 I have no doubt that the MC-700 will sound really good, better than AVR's costing 4 or 5 times as much, hence sensation value for money. Off course the XMC-1 will sound better, but how much better? Almost certainly not in proportion to its higher price, the law off diminishing returns applies to audio equipment and very much to processors. As a result my suggestion is to look at the big picture, the whole life of the processor/processors, sound quality on its own is too simple a measure. Cheers Gary I wholeheartedly agree with you Gary. Processors DO have very short lives. As much as I love my XMC-1, there have been many times as of late where I've considered simply replacing it with the MC-700 because, at its price point (after UFL discount), it would be about the same as the upcoming "fully blown" HDMI 2.0/2.2 board upgrade. For now, that's the only upgrade that I'm interested in and, with the MC-700, I could have it much sooner. With the XMC-1 upgrade, it's a 4-6 week turnaround at Emotiva "after" it becomes available. I don't know how accurate that estimate really is, but that's what it states for the currently available upgrade board. Personally, I'd have a hard time going without a processor for that long. I've already put my XSP-1 back into my system because I prefer it handling my analog duties. Since all of my "digital" sources already have excellent digital stages, I'm perfectly happy with my XSP-1 being the heart of the system. Once my XMC-1 reaches "end of life", I'm going to start moving forward with just simple low cost processor replacements, such as the MC-700. My room is small and my needs are simple. I have no need for Atmos or DTS X. So, I'm never going there. For me, for HT purposes alone, something that sounds "really good" is good enough. I "listen" to music and I "watch" movies...
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jan 17, 2017 19:23:01 GMT -5
I believe the question is not as simple as "which sounds better" there are other important considerations. The fact is processors have very short lives and as such there is a price point at which it becomes uneconomical to exceed. Emotiva have done a good job in making the XMC-1 upgradable but the fact is the upgrades cost much the same as buying a new MC-700 (especially for those of us with the 25% UFL discount). It's not just price, right now the MC-700 has 3 x 4k HDMI video inputs that support 4k UHD HDR video and HDCP 2.2. That's not unusual, I had my UMC-200 for two and half years before the XMC-1 became available, so it "sounded better" then the XMC-1 because there wasn't one. The product development cycle, due to higher selling numbers, is always going to be faster for the lower priced processor and as a result it's going to leap frog the higher priced processor for some period of time. Then the higher priced processor will have "superior features" until the lower priced processor leap frogs it again. So over 10/15/20 years the lower priced processor provides "superior features" whilst costing substantially less. The bonus is having a hand me down processor to use in other rooms, for the kids etc. Based on the UMC-1 and the UMC-200 I have no doubt that the MC-700 will sound really good, better than AVR's costing 4 or 5 times as much, hence sensation value for money. Off course the XMC-1 will sound better, but how much better? Almost certainly not in proportion to its higher price, the law off diminishing returns applies to audio equipment and very much to processors. As a result my suggestion is to look at the big picture, the whole life of the processor/processors, sound quality on its own is too simple a measure. I wholeheartedly agree with you Gary. Processors DO have very short lives. As much as I love my XMC-1, there have been many times as of late where I've considered simply replacing it with the MC-700 because, at its price point (after UFL discount), it would be about the same as the upcoming "fully blown" HDMI 2.0/2.2 board upgrade. For now, that's the only upgrade that I'm interested in and, with the MC-700, I could have it much sooner. With the XMC-1 upgrade, it's a 4-6 week turnaround at Emotiva "after" it becomes available. I don't know how accurate that estimate really is, but that's what it states for the currently available upgrade board. Personally, I'd have a hard time going without a processor for that long. I've already put my XSP-1 back into my system because I prefer it handling my analog duties. Since all of my "digital" sources already have excellent digital stages, I'm perfectly happy with my XSP-1 being the heart of the system. Once my XMC-1 reaches "end of life", I'm going to start moving forward with just simple low cost processor replacements, such as the MC-700. My room is small and my needs are simple. I have no need for Atmos or DTS X. So, I'm never going there. For me, for HT purposes alone, something that sounds "really good" is good enough. I "listen" to music and I "watch" movies... Completely agree, I suspect that the XSP-1 will be in my system for a very long time, for 2.1 music there's nothing I have heard that even comes close. Personally, if I had an XMC-1 I would probably go through the upgrades, extending its life, extracting the maximum value for money, until there isn't any more updates available. Then I'd make a call based on what's around at that time. I would also suggest waiting until the actual turn around time gets a bit more reasonable, although in my case I'd have to do the upgrades myself, it would cost me more in freight than the upgrades cost. Cheers Gary
|
|
|
Post by millst on Jan 17, 2017 22:52:26 GMT -5
How on Earth is the MC-700 going to sound better than a $2500 receiver? Magic? Marantz, Anthem, etc. are making MASSIVE profits? I'm sure it's great, but let's be reasonable...
-tm
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Jan 17, 2017 22:59:01 GMT -5
If nothing else, whatever amp you pair it with will out perform the amplifier section of any receiver.
|
|
|
Post by harlan on Jan 18, 2017 7:16:39 GMT -5
Mine is up and running. Not fully dialed-in but so far 4K/HDR works fine from my connected devices... I'm still trying to figure out how to rename my inputs... Same for me. I got it up and running and need to figure out how to rename inputs and do a calibration. I wish the microphone jack was in the front. Does anyone know if you can leave it plugged in? With the frequency that my feng shui girl friend changes the furniture around, its going to get used every month. I havent had the chance to look at any 4k material or do any critical listening but first impressiins tell me the sound stage is much improved over my PE 92THX. I'm off Thursday and hope to spend a lot of time with it then.
|
|
|
Post by pmctexas on Jan 18, 2017 7:54:49 GMT -5
While not completely dialed-in I replaced my XMC-1 with XSP-1 and MC700 combo. It's a 5 channel system in a bedroom sized room as I moved to a much smaller place. I purchased a Schiit Freya for my 2 channel room and moved the XSP-1 to pair with the MC700. I run the MC700 just for 4K video connected to Vizio P class display. So far it sounds (and looks) great. Actually, I think I have more mid-bass... Perhaps it is not more "technically" accurate than Dirac but I like it... I plan to sell the XMC-1 and use this set-up for awhile.
Other factors to consider. The display on the XMC is much easier to see and I see typical "bugs" that come with a new Emo processor - so your also comparing a "mature" product to one that will need updates. Many will be frustrated over "bugs". Overall quality "feel" is different between the two (e.g., remote, overall size, weight).
One of my first issues is getting the Vizio to show volume - right now it doesn't do any sort of display overlay.. Not sure what is going on yet. Also, the renamed inputs don't show on the MC700 perhaps it truncates after the first 5 characters ?
I expect a MC700 "bug" thread will be started soon... I'll call them in if others are finding similar issues as I continue to experiment..,.
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Jan 18, 2017 8:22:30 GMT -5
Where did the troll Tom go?
|
|