|
Post by davidl81 on Aug 30, 2018 13:59:38 GMT -5
Perhaps you are confusing sound quality with sheer decibel output, which was the primary reason for separates. (Customize power) Bill I have separate amps for all speakers so no, not concerned about power. The Yamaha is basically my processor. Just wondering if I would get "that" much better SQ for 2 channel from a higher end processor, receiver or using an external DAC. FWIW I just recently replaced my Marantz SR7009 (AVR) with the AV8802A processor. I was running external amps before and after the switch, so the only think I changed was the processor. Everything sounds so much better since the upgrade. 2 channel is just so much fuller and better sounding than before. Technically I can't quite figure out what made that big of a difference, maybe some upgraded DAC's and some small circuitry things, but the audible difference is amazing.
|
|
|
Post by romanski on Aug 30, 2018 16:42:01 GMT -5
I just upgraded last month to the MC-700 Pre/Pro after using a Yamaha RX-A1030 for my Pre/Pro. Night and day difference to the better on the MC-700, especially after using the EMO-Q room sound correction feature. At $699, great bang for the buck.
|
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,495
|
Post by LCSeminole on Aug 30, 2018 17:07:47 GMT -5
I just upgraded last month to the MC-700 Pre/Pro after using a Yamaha RX-A1030 for my Pre/Pro. Night and day difference to the better on the MC-700, especially after using the EMO-Q room sound correction feature. At $699, great bang for the buck. Just to add to your thoughts, I think you’d be pleasantly surprised if you gave/tried REW a chance and took those results and plugged them into the MC-700’s P-EQ filters.
|
|
|
Post by overtheair on Sept 1, 2018 16:07:12 GMT -5
Works well and for me, the sound is very good. As good as anything I've owned.
This tells me that there is certainly no need to change anything for you or at least no rush to do so You are using very sensitive speakers with high quality external amplification so the critique of the RX-A860 pre-amp outputs in this Audioholics review probably don't apply and again you enjoy what you have anyway. So why get a new AVR or pre-pro, especially if its only for a possible improvement for 2-channel use? IMHO it may come down to room correction capability since the room and the speakers affect what you hear more than anything else, although its entirely possible your room may not need it. However most rooms will probably benefit, especially in the treatment of bass where it looks like you only have a single sub-woofer and/or are using your Klipsch Forte's full range which claim to reach 32Hz +/-3dB; none of which may be in an optimum position for bass in your room. Dirac room correction is widely considered to be one of the best if not the best room correction software and is being increasingly adopted by many AVR and pre-pro manufacturers including Emotiva. Some will advocate purchasing equipment based on higher spec DAC technology and IMV there is way too much focus on this single aspect in AVR or pre-pro specs. I don't subscribe to this, especially when using room correction software and especially with the quality of DACs today. A company's reputation for good analog design following engineering principles rather than "tuned by golden ear" designers is more important IMHO than which DAC is used. What becomes important with room correction is accurate measuring of sound in the room, i.e. calibrated mike, good ADC etc and then good reproduction of the analog output signal that accurately reproduces the corrected sound calculated by the processor. Given what I have said I would hold fire on any changes to your system and do the following. See how the RMC-1 launch goes, then wait for the XMC-2 and see how that goes. The RMC-2 looks like it will still cost much more than your current Yamaha though and may still be overkill. I'd also wait until after CES to see if Emotiva talk about a lower price point pre-pro in the $1500 range. My speculation is that Emotiva need to fill their range with something here that includes Dirac and Atmos and which heavily leverages much of what they have spent so long developing for RMC-1 and XMC-2. If I am correct then this might then give you improved 2-channel performance with room correction at a reasonable price point that will improve your listening experience. Just my 2c of course Edit: You might find this comparison experiment between AVR's and Pre-pro an interesting read about whether you might discern differences. Beware expectation bias too.
|
|
cgolf
Emo VIPs
Posts: 4,613
|
Post by cgolf on Sept 2, 2018 6:05:47 GMT -5
Works well and for me, the sound is very good. As good as anything I've owned.
This tells me that there is certainly no need to change anything for you or at least no rush to do so You are using very sensitive speakers with high quality external amplification so the critique of the RX-A860 pre-amp outputs in this Audioholics review probably don't apply and again you enjoy what you have anyway. So why get a new AVR or pre-pro, especially if its only for a possible improvement for 2-channel use? IMHO it may come down to room correction capability since the room and the speakers affect what you hear more than anything else, although its entirely possible your room may not need it. However most rooms will probably benefit, especially in the treatment of bass where it looks like you only have a single sub-woofer and/or are using your Klipsch Forte's full range which claim to reach 32Hz +/-3dB; none of which may be in an optimum position for bass in your room. Dirac room correction is widely considered to be one of the best if not the best room correction software and is being increasingly adopted by many AVR and pre-pro manufacturers including Emotiva. Some will advocate purchasing equipment based on higher spec DAC technology and IMV there is way too much focus on this single aspect in AVR or pre-pro specs. I don't subscribe to this, especially when using room correction software and especially with the quality of DACs today. A company's reputation for good analog design following engineering principles rather than "tuned by golden ear" designers is more important IMHO than which DAC is used. What becomes important with room correction is accurate measuring of sound in the room, i.e. calibrated mike, good ADC etc and then good reproduction of the analog output signal that accurately reproduces the corrected sound calculated by the processor. Given what I have said I would hold fire on any changes to your system and do the following. See how the RMC-1 launch goes, then wait for the XMC-2 and see how that goes. The RMC-2 looks like it will still cost much more than your current Yamaha though and may still be overkill. I'd also wait until after CES to see if Emotiva talk about a lower price point pre-pro in the $1500 range. My speculation is that Emotiva need to fill their range with something here that includes Dirac and Atmos and which heavily leverages much of what they have spent so long developing for RMC-1 and XMC-2. If I am correct then this might then give you improved 2-channel performance with room correction at a reasonable price point that will improve your listening experience. Just my 2c of course Edit: You might find this comparison experiment between AVR's and Pre-pro an interesting read about whether you might discern differences. Beware expectation bias too. Thanks for all the great feedback. My original intent or motive never was really that I thought I needed to upgrade. That's always on the table. It was more a curiosity question posed to understand what the differences were if I paid say $600 for a processor or I paid $2500 for one. What do we really get for all the extra $$? Some great comments. Thanks.
|
|
cgolf
Emo VIPs
Posts: 4,613
|
Post by cgolf on Sept 2, 2018 7:46:00 GMT -5
I just upgraded last month to the MC-700 Pre/Pro after using a Yamaha RX-A1030 for my Pre/Pro. Night and day difference to the better on the MC-700, especially after using the EMO-Q room sound correction feature. At $699, great bang for the buck. OK good to know. Examples work wonders!!
|
|
|
Post by millst on Sept 2, 2018 10:31:28 GMT -5
You don't necessarily get anything by paying more for a prepro. Sometimes manufacturers take one of their receivers, strip out the amps, and sell it to you for more. Other times, that budget/effort is redirected from amps to making a better preamp.
As far as sound, digital technology is pretty mature. I'd be skeptical of anyone that says there is a massive difference sonically. Quadruply so if they haven't bothered to treat their room. You get into the realm of diminishing returns once you get past the budget receivers. That value proposition varies based on your ears and income.
-tm
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Sept 3, 2018 11:23:24 GMT -5
My 20 cents worth of suggestions follow;
It would concern me that I’d paid $whatever for amplifiers (in the AVR) that I don’t use. So instead of a, say, $600 AVR I’m actually listening to, say, a $300 processor whilst, say, $300 was wasted on amps that I don’t use. Then when the AVR gets out of date technically, which happens regularly, I then waste another, say, $300 on more amps that I won’t use.
If it’s stereo 2.1 sound quality improvement that you’re looking for then I’d suggest a pre amp with HT bypass so it can be used within the current system. A decent analogue pre amp (eg; USP-1 or XMC-1) will give a noticeable improvement. Like power amps, good analogue pre amps last a long time, decades even, as they don’t go out of date technically. If you need a stereo DAC (in the pre amp) then something like a DC-1, but with HT bypass would make a noticeable difference.
If it’s just HT sound quality that you’re looking to improve than a UMC-200 or an MC-700 (if you need 4K switching) would be big a step up from any AVR costing similar $’s. It’s not necessary to spend XMC-1 (or RMC-1) money to improve on what you already have.
Cheers Gary
|
|