UMC-1 Specs - THD, Noise, etc?

[funboy]

I am of the philosophy that measurements can tell you almost everything you want to know about electronics in terms of audio. Others may disagree, but nonetheless, I was wondering if there are any specs about the UMC-1 in terms of:

Signal-to-Noise Ratio
Distortion within the frequency response
Frequency Response with amount of deviation
Channel Separation

I picked some of the measurements I believe are most important and also that are listed for the USP-1. I know the UMC-1 won't measure as well, but personally I believe the USP-1 measures perfect far beyond anyone can hear and my standards are a touch lower - near perfect is perfect if you cannot tell the difference.

[nnntomas]

It´s interesting questions i waiting for answer too.

[roadrunner]

I suspect that Dann will post the AP Test results for the UMC-1 shortly after the new FW update becomes available. There is no point running the test until the UMC-1 is running with all the bugs corrected. ;D

[bootman]

Feb 3, 2010 14:51:44 GMT -5 nnntomas said:

It´s interesting questions i waiting for answer too.

Interesting theory.
I take it that the OP hates tube gear and vinyl.

[brettjb]

Feb 3, 2010 16:15:53 GMT -5 bootman said:

I take it that the OP hates tube gear and vinyl.

Not necessarily - OP may simply be more concerned about accurate reproduction of digital sources. Relevant, I think, given Emotiva's focus on the digital realm for the UMC-1.

I, too, would be curious to see these figures, as easily 90% of my listening is from digital sources. That's not to say I don't enjoy the occasional foray back into my vinyl collection, but it's not a primary concern for me. If it were, I suspect I'd already have talked myself into a dedicated two-channel rig like the USP-1.

I don't know that numbers can tell the whole story (after all, everybody's system is analog from speaker to ear! ) but I think they do allow for some comparisons to be made.

And let me clarify - the numbers asked for by the OP are important in both analog and digital source reproduction (re-reading my post gave even me the impression that I thought they were only valid for digital!) I was responding more to bootman's assertion that the OP didn't like vinyl/tubes (i.e. analog sources). It's sad when I manage to confuse even myself! ;D

[bootman]

My comment was more tongue in cheek.

I've heard some beautiful sounding tube gear that really didn't measure well compared to say a dry sounding Onkyo receiver.

Specs are important but it doesn't always tell you everything.

Some people actually like 2nd order harmonic distortions.
First and third order not so much.

But to get back on topic, yes the specs should be up after a known good working unit (with shipping firmware) is fully tested.

[moe]

I have a related ? If a unit specs really good but sounds not so good to the owner,what does the owner do? If a unit specs mediocre but sounds really sweet to the owner,what does the owner do?

[pultzar]

Feb 3, 2010 21:55:43 GMT -5 moe said:

I have a related ? If a unit specs really good but sounds not so good to the owner,what does the owner do? If a unit specs mediocre but sounds really sweet to the owner,what does the owner do?

Sounds really good to owner = Keep unit and be happy
Does not sound good to owner = Check placebo type effects to make sure it isn't your brain playing tricks, otherwise get something else.

[brijenjas]

Feb 3, 2010 21:55:43 GMT -5 moe said:

I have a related ? If a unit specs really good but sounds not so good to the owner,what does the owner do?

Get rid of it.

If a unit specs mediocre but sounds really sweet to the owner,what does the owner do?

Keep it.

Pretty simple, all that should matter is how it sounds to you in your setup.

[littlesaint]

With a pre-amp, these numbers are going to be insignificant. The values are so far below hearing perception that any differences between units means nothing, and once you connect it up to an amp, its values in these areas are going to be orders of magnitude more significant.

[jvgillow]

Any connected amplifier will "amplify" noise from the pre-amp so the numbers are definitely useful. Amps are not exempt from the garbage-in, garbage-out rule. Sure, a crappy amp could make any preamp sound awful, but a poor preamp will sound bad even with the world's best amplifier.

[littlesaint]

Feb 4, 2010 11:05:50 GMT -5 jvgillow said:

Any connected amplifier will "amplify" noise from the pre-amp so the numbers are definitely useful. Amps are not exempt from the garbage-in, garbage-out rule. Sure, a crappy amp could make any preamp sound awful, but a poor preamp will sound bad even with the world's best amplifier.

True, but these numbers - even for a "average" pre-amp - are beyond the threshold of hearing.

Like Dyohn's sig says: Inaudible is inaudible and you don't get extra brownie points for making it twice as inaudible as another solution

[moe]

Feb 3, 2010 23:01:19 GMT -5 brijenjas said:

Feb 3, 2010 21:55:43 GMT -5 moe said:

I have a related ? If a unit specs really good but sounds not so good to the owner,what does the owner do?

Get rid of it.

If a unit specs mediocre but sounds really sweet to the owner,what does the owner do?

Keep it.

Pretty simple, all that should matter is how it sounds to you in your setup.

That is correct.

[funboy]

I am kind of with littlesaint on this one. Also, I have never heard electronics that measure well that sound poor (definitely not a pre-amp, and not an amp that has been measured properly and played within its limits). I have heard speakers that measure well that sound poor - but their measurements are much more complex and there is always the pesky room to interfere. Electronics, however, are much more straightforward.

Also, I am part of the crowd who isn't a big fan of vinyl. I don't have much against it, but it seems to be the even ordered harmonic distortion that sounds pleasing. Don't mean to open up a can of worms here, and to allow people to dismiss my views, I will admit I never gave vinyl much of a chance.

But I still hope to get my original question answered one day. Some specs on the UMC-1 would validate my claims to those that believe in specs that purchasing it would allow sonic perfection from everything from blu ray movies to 2 channel stereo played from FLAC files ripped from CDs. The naysayers are free to spend their money on USP-1's and the ERC-1. Maybe some can hear a difference, I personally, cannot.

[weigle2]

Being old school (and old), specs were a useful way of measuring the quality (not sound) of the components used and the engineering put into a product. It was especially useful for early solid state gear for comparison purposes with tube gear.

I'm all for published specs, done by a third party lab using standardized testing methods. It should only be used as a reference when comparing other gear, but I agree, I would like to see specs.

The bottom line is how does it sound. Just my 2 cents.

Thanks,
Weigle2

[satow]

I'm of the philosophy that electronic measurements are just indicators of the equipment's electrical capability, i.e. that it meets certain electronic standards.

This may give you a sense of what the equipment is capable of but not necessarily what it "sounds" like.

For example, personally I found that a carbon resistor sounds different than a metal oxide resistor even with the same values, polypropylene and teflon capacitors sound different than metal foil, etc., even though they are rated the same.

I have used both tubes and solid state amps in my audio systems. I am fond of both. Currently, I'm on a bookshelf speaker and solid state amp kick. (creek passive pre and power driving Epos ELS-3's)

Before I was using a Transcendent GG Preamp and SE-OTL power amp, driving a pair of La Scala's using the ALK engineering X-overs.

The GG preamp was modded based upon an article by Clive Meakins called "On the Starting Grid", published in Hi-Fi World magazine, November 2002, DIY supplement.

The SE-OTL was built per instruction. The ALK x-overs are the universal ones.

My tube system was very accurate sounding, but smoother and polished. My current solid state system is much more precise, faster, and I guess cleaner sounding. (I know these terms don't make much sense, but it's the only way I can describe it)

Now that I'm trying to build my AV system. I'm planning on using the UMC-1 as the preamp and control center. Not sure if the Emotiva power amps will sound as good as the Creek A42 power amp, but will start from here.

Now that I've ranted, I still like to look at specifications. Without them, you can't really tell what you are buying. Specs help focus the buyer into making a better more informed decision. After that, then reviews, then audition if possible.

This is how I usually purchase my AV equipment.