bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Apr 6, 2010 7:30:44 GMT -5
The XMC-1 will have balanced outputs, but it will not be a fully balanced design. Would you ore someone else be kind enough to explain fully balanced design in a preamp or prepro? In simple terms: Balanced designs carry audio on a pair of wires. (neither of which is grounded BTW) The voltage of the signal is identical on both wires but the polarity is opposite. This design (along with the usual twisting of the wires carrying the audio signals) offers the advantage of reduced magnetic interference and high common noise rejection. (any noise induced into the audio path gets canceled out via the out of phase arrangement.)
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Apr 6, 2010 7:59:24 GMT -5
Would you ore someone else be kind enough to explain fully balanced design in a preamp or prepro? In simple terms: Balanced designs carry audio on a pair of wires. (neither of which is grounded BTW) The voltage of the signal is identical on both wires but the polarity is opposite. This design (along with the usual twisting of the wires carrying the audio signals) offers the advantage of reduced magnetic interference and high common noise rejection. (any noise induced into the audio path gets canceled out via the out of phase arrangement.) Sure, in theory. But what about real life experience?
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Apr 6, 2010 8:44:43 GMT -5
In simple terms: Balanced designs carry audio on a pair of wires. (neither of which is grounded BTW) The voltage of the signal is identical on both wires but the polarity is opposite. This design (along with the usual twisting of the wires carrying the audio signals) offers the advantage of reduced magnetic interference and high common noise rejection. (any noise induced into the audio path gets canceled out via the out of phase arrangement.) Sure, in theory. But what about real life experience? If you have a setup where the prepro and amp(s) are separated by more than 10 feet, I would seriously consider a balanced setup. All other times, if I had them I would use them just for the more secure connections, but I would not go around touting the sonic benefits. Now if we where talking about balanced power then I could show you some real benefits.
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Apr 6, 2010 8:59:31 GMT -5
...I trust you. I was being snarky.
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Apr 6, 2010 9:54:41 GMT -5
Okay, I know that this has probably been covered in this thread but being the lazy person I am and not wanting to wade through 37 pages, I figure at least one of you is on the ball and up to date and can provide a neat summary answer to my question.
I know the XMC-1 has more features than the UMC-1, but in terms of video and audio quality (I am more concerned with the audio, as I am not a video tweaker), is there much of a difference between the two, given that I am already using a USP-1?
I am wondering if there is a compelling reason to wait for the XMC-1 instead of (re)purchasing the UMC-1. Like I said, I don't need the extra features like balanced outs, etc., but am just concerned about how much extra video or audio quality there may be in the XMC-1 versus UMC-1. Does the XMC-1 have a different version of Emo-Q or a more sophisticated equalizer?
Anyway, thanks from this lazy fellow. ;D
|
|
Erwin.BE
Emo VIPs
It's the room, stupid!
Posts: 2,268
|
Post by Erwin.BE on Apr 6, 2010 10:18:59 GMT -5
Okay, I know that this has probably been covered in this thread but being the lazy person I am and not wanting to wade through 37 pages, I figure at least one of you is on the ball and up to date and can provide a neat summary answer to my question. I know the XMC-1 has more features than the UMC-1, but in terms of video and audio quality (I am more concerned with the audio, as I am not a video tweaker), is there much of a difference between the two, given that I am already using a USP-1? I am wondering if there is a compelling reason to wait for the XMC-1 instead of (re)purchasing the UMC-1. Like I said, I don't need the extra features like balanced outs, etc., but am just concerned about how much extra video or audio quality there may be in the XMC-1 versus UMC-1. Does the XMC-1 have a different version of Emo-Q or a more sophisticated equalizer? Anyway, thanks from this lazy fellow. ;D Balanced out is not a feature, it's better SQ. Less chance for unwanted noises. According to Lonnie, there will be better, exceptional SQ and VQ. But he would say that, wouldn't he? Now, where did I put my glass sphere ;D
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Apr 6, 2010 10:39:54 GMT -5
Okay, I know that this has probably been covered in this thread but being the lazy person I am and not wanting to wade through 37 pages, I figure at least one of you is on the ball and up to date and can provide a neat summary answer to my question. I know the XMC-1 has more features than the UMC-1, but in terms of video and audio quality (I am more concerned with the audio, as I am not a video tweaker), is there much of a difference between the two, given that I am already using a USP-1? I am wondering if there is a compelling reason to wait for the XMC-1 instead of (re)purchasing the UMC-1. Like I said, I don't need the extra features like balanced outs, etc., but am just concerned about how much extra video or audio quality there may be in the XMC-1 versus UMC-1. Does the XMC-1 have a different version of Emo-Q or a more sophisticated equalizer? Anyway, thanks from this lazy fellow. ;D Balanced out is not a feature, it's better SQ. Less chance for unwanted noises. According to Lonnie, there will be better, exceptional SQ and VQ. But he would say that, wouldn't he? Now, where did I put my glass sphere ;D I don't have long cable runs or problems that require balanced outs so I wouldn't use them. As for the better SQ and VQ, I hear you. ;D It's like, what else are they going to say? They have to justify the higher price. But is there really going to be a significant difference? Because if you advertise the existing product (like the UMC-1 or the ERC-1) as being of very high quality, how can you say that the newer products are astoundingly better? Because that also implies that the older products were not very good, if there is such a big difference. Also, if the goal is to reproduce the original source in an accurate manner, when you say something sounds "better" is that meaning it is more accurate or you have more control over the final sound? Anyway, while I consider myself an Emo "fanboy" I do feel that there's hype going on about how much better the quality of sound is going to be coming from the XMC-1 or the external DAC's being released. It just doesn't seem like they could be THAT much better, because then it follows that the other stuff is THAT much worse. I would say it is more like the law of diminishing returns. So my original question was designed to get an answer as to whether, for my average ears and eyes that get worse each day, it is worth waiting for the XMC-1 and am I really going to be able to hear or see much difference over the UMC-1. ;D
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 6, 2010 10:56:38 GMT -5
I would say it is more like the law of diminishing returns. So my original question was designed to get an answer as to whether, for my average ears and eyes that get worse each day, it is worth waiting for the XMC-1 and am I really going to be able to hear or see much difference over the UMC-1. ;D That's always true, that's what this whole hobby is about. From that perspective, though, a UMC-1 + UPA-7 ($1400) is a waste of money compared to a 7.1 Yamaha/Denon/Onkyo receiver. They all sound pretty good and can be had in the $400-500 range with all the features of the UMC-1. The XMC-1 is definitely going to sound better, or they wouldn't release it. The other thing to consider is that you have to also equally increase the quality of your components around it. If you bought your speakers at a Circuit City going-out-of-business sale, and don't intend to upgrade them, then I'm going to recommend you stick with a nice Denon receiver and not 'waste' money on a UMC-1, or an XMC-1 or a Krell Evolution 707.
|
|
|
Post by roadrunner on Apr 6, 2010 20:21:23 GMT -5
monkumonku
I am not sure how much this will help, but when Lonnie was discussing the relative sound quality of the UMC-1 and the XMC-1 he said that they would be using the discrete analog circuits that they developed for the USP-1 and the ERC-1 in the XMC-1. Emotiva will also be using a better DAC in the XMC-1.
Now if we go back far enough to review what Lonnie said about the sound quality of the USP-1 and the ERC-1 you will understand why the native SQ of the XMC-1 will be better than the UMC-1. Lonnie said that the USP-1 had significantly better sound quality than either the UMC-1 or the XMC-1. This is partially because the USP-1's sound floor is about 20 dB better. A thorough discussion of other factors that made the USP-1 better sounding can be found in the USP-1's thread.
Since you will be using the USP-1 in combination with the UMC-1 the gap between the sound quality of the XMC/UMC will be marginal. In areas where the differences in the DAC used in the respective pre/pro come into play, the XMC may have an edge. Since you do not need nor desire the additional features of the XMC-1, there is little need for you to consider choosing the XMC over the UMC/USP combo. If you did not have the USP-1 the XMC-1 would definitely have superior sound quality over the UMC-1 by itself.
There are quite a few Lounge Members who have made the same decision that you are contemplating. The USP/UMC combo make an outstanding marriage that has great synergy.
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Apr 6, 2010 21:50:44 GMT -5
monkumonku I am not sure how much this will help, but when Lonnie was discussing the relative sound quality of the UMC-1 and the XMC-1 he said that they would be using the discrete analog circuits that they developed for the USP-1 and the ERC-1 in the XMC-1. Emotiva will also be using a better DAC in the XMC-1. Now if we go back far enough to review what Lonnie said about the sound quality of the USP-1 and the ERC-1 you will understand why the native SQ of the XMC-1 will be better than the UMC-1. Lonnie said that the USP-1 had significantly better sound quality than either the UMC-1 or the XMC-1. This is partially because the USP-1's sound floor is about 20 dB better. A thorough discussion of other factors that made the USP-1 better sounding can be found in the USP-1's thread. Since you will be using the USP-1 in combination with the UMC-1 the gap between the sound quality of the XMC/UMC will be marginal. In areas where the differences in the DAC used in the respective pre/pro come into play, the XMC may have an edge. Since you do not need nor desire the additional features of the XMC-1, there is little need for you to consider choosing the XMC over the UMC/USP combo. If you did not have the USP-1 the XMC-1 would definitely have superior sound quality over the UMC-1 by itself. There are quite a few Lounge Members who have made the same decision that you are contemplating. The USP/UMC combo make an outstanding marriage that has great synergy. Thanks, Roadrunner! I was kind of thinking along those lines but it sure helps to get opinions from knowledgeable folks!
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 7, 2010 1:29:17 GMT -5
One other thing to consider is that not everyone here is completely smitten with the quality of 2-channel digital sources from the UMC-1. In other words, any DAC improvement in the XMC-1 is going to be a significant benefit for digital inputs.
|
|
|
Post by jutta on Apr 7, 2010 7:38:54 GMT -5
The XMC has a headphone output. That's one thing that is making my decision hard. I have the USP-1 which has a HP jack for 2ch listening but the UMC does not have a HP jack for HT listening. Quite often use it for late night viewing/GTHero with the young family. Will not be an issue when we build again and have a dedicated HT room so may go the UMC when my number is up, soon. I really don't like listening at low levels, it defeats the purpose of the home cinema setup for me.
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 7, 2010 10:16:42 GMT -5
I really don't like listening at low levels, it defeats the purpose of the home cinema setup for me. Well, theoretically, so do headphones.
|
|
|
Post by siccivic420 on Apr 7, 2010 14:19:37 GMT -5
Didn't they say they would let us know what the DAC's were going to be in the XMC'1 before they released the umc'1?
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 7, 2010 16:19:39 GMT -5
Didn't they say they would let us know what the DAC's were going to be in the XMC'1 before they released the umc'1? I don't believe that Emotiva has ever made a commitment to delivering any information about the XMC-1 with relation to the shipping time of the UMC-1. Considering the UMC-1's issues, I, personally, do not expect to get XMC-1 information any time soon. I, personally, expect that we'll all have to decide on the UMC-1 based on its own merits and when the XMC-1 becomes available, decide what to do then.
|
|
|
Post by oscartheclimber on Apr 8, 2010 18:05:14 GMT -5
I don't ever recall reading the VQ will be better. The best that could be hoped for is more customization / per input settings. Now that may equate to better VQ for you.
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 8, 2010 19:16:53 GMT -5
I don't ever recall reading the VQ will be better. The best that could be hoped for is more customization / per input settings. Now that may equate to better VQ for you. What, exactly, Emotiva plans to do to improve video quality with the XMC-1, I don't believe is public knowledge. They have said, though, that they plan to take "it up a notch". See #2: emonatics.com/XMC-1.shtml
|
|
|
Post by kellys on Apr 13, 2010 23:06:01 GMT -5
I would really like to hear some further details on the XMC-1. I am still waiting for some news, but instead I am really considering a standalone DAC for two channel audio and going with the UMC-1 for HT.
Emotiva, please update us with XMC-1 pricing and finalized specs so that I can decide whether it is worth it to wait...!
|
|
HiRez
Seeker Of Truth
Posts: 4
|
Post by HiRez on Apr 22, 2010 5:02:49 GMT -5
What will be the DACs inside the XMC-1? What about the external DAC I remember reading somewhere (or am I mistaken)? Will it have native DSD support? Will it have HD-Radio support? As far as THX certification goes: They say: "The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded." I say: "I am a Toydarian. Mind tricks don't work on me. Only money."
|
|
|
Post by gocolts on Apr 22, 2010 8:18:48 GMT -5
Emotiva needs to give us an updated ETA on the XMC-1, along with answer some of the questions people have asked above, before they open the floodgates for the UMC-1, which they claim is coming "soon".
|
|