|
|
Post by carlp336 on Apr 19, 2010 9:30:37 GMT -5
i agree the quality of the remote is not great and it is small but its light weight and functional. ive already programed my URC for the umc and thats cool. i prematurely made another about the remote quality but ultimately it doesnt matter to me. the urc remote nice or not is going into the drawer with all the others even the billet aluminum MMC-1 is in that drawer...
i think a remote choice given at hte purchase stage would be an awesome idea.
|
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs 
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Apr 19, 2010 9:31:02 GMT -5
The primary reason that the UMC-1 comes with the cheap looking plastic remote control is that Emotiva polled the customers during the design stage; and, the response was overwhelmingly for Emotiva to furnish a minimal cost remote control. Most of the responders stated that they already owned 3rd party universal remote controls and did NOT want a high quality remote to accompany the UMC-1. The furnished remote, although cheap looking, is surprisingly effective in the day-to-day usage of the UMC-1. As a matter of fact, it is often easier and faster to use it than to use one of the universal remotes -- particularly if you have used the switch to make the unused inputs "invisible" (as Hemster described above). Unfortunately, by listening to what the customer base so strongly stated they wanted, they have angered those customers who would have preferred the fancy aluminum "tanks" that shipped with the ERC-1. Emotiva will shortly be offering an optional aluminum remote control that has 8 discrete input buttons, as well as several other useful direct access buttons for frequently used features. No price has yet been mentioned for acquiring this optional remote control, but for those customers who don't already own universal remotes it should satisfy the "quality" complaints about the current remote. ;D I use the Harmony One, and one of the cool features is that you can adjust the button "sensitivity" and speed. So you can make the One respond just as quick as the UMC-1's own remote for fast acess. |
|
|
|
Post by phipp01 on Apr 19, 2010 10:01:17 GMT -5
I will pass on the advice to return the UMC-1. I actually like the processor even though I believe that producing a cheap and barely adequate remote was both a mistake and a good example why democracy is often better in concept than in practice. What I will return to Emotiva, however is this forum. If it ever returns to respectful and logical discourse, I might find it useful to return. But, at the moment, there is a "Lord of the Flies" atmosphere that seems to permeate the very core of the forum. For Hempster who was unable to perceive an attack in any of the replies, here's food for perhaps additional thought: "Your complain about the remote sounds like you are entering it into a contest. As long as the remote works your complaint has no merit. Now take a seat and quit nagging about a working remote. Complain about current issues at hand." or perhaps try this on: "Here is a thought for you. Some people have the UMC-1 but it does not work. Some wants the UMC-1 but are on the waiting list. You have the UMC-1 and it does work. So what is your problem?" This response uses the word "you" or "your" three times. It say nothing about the issue I raised. It challenges me for making the argument in the first place. My view of human behavior puts this reply in the attack mode. I realize that moderating a forum is often a thankless job and I have no desire to pile on to that load, but to not see Coolhands' replies for what they are is unfortunate. Now you are learning. If you attack a complaint about emo you can do what ever you wish. However if you complain about emo your thread or post gets deleted quick. I wholeheartedly agree with you post |
|
hemster
Global Moderator 
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,952
|
Post by hemster on Apr 19, 2010 10:17:49 GMT -5
^ That's really quite a simplistic attempt to rationalize the situation.  The language used has nothing to do with being pro or anti Emotiva. If that were true there would be no discussion at all on this forum. Please realize that posts in a forum are not communication. There is no intonation such as with verbal dialog, so much about intention and emotion is assumed and inferred. It would be worth our while to choose our words carefully. This is not targeted at any particular member but to all of us... including the mods (who after all, are also paying customers like everyone else). Now, let's get back on topic please. |
|
|
|
Post by moodyman on Apr 19, 2010 10:32:15 GMT -5
Would you be happy if they added a $50 at cost remote and adjusted the price of the UMC to $799? Some would but others would say drop the expensive remote as I already have a universal remote. So instead of raising the price to $799 they kept it at $699 and are giving the option to buy an upgraded remote possibly for $100 effectively raising the price to $799 for those who need a remote without charging those who don't need the remote... I don't understand why this is so hard for people to understand. They can add a great remote and raise the price or keep the price down and give the option to buy an upgraded remote. LOL!! Nobody is saying Emotiva should of provided a $50 remote. What we are saying is if they spent $3 on the remote instead of $0.75 the remote would be 10x better..  But yes..complaining about the remote is somewhat trivial given the other issues at hand... |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 19, 2010 10:56:56 GMT -5
Would you be happy if they added a $50 at cost remote and adjusted the price of the UMC to $799? Some would but others would say drop the expensive remote as I already have a universal remote. So instead of raising the price to $799 they kept it at $699 and are giving the option to buy an upgraded remote possibly for $100 effectively raising the price to $799 for those who need a remote without charging those who don't need the remote... I don't understand why this is so hard for people to understand. They can add a great remote and raise the price or keep the price down and give the option to buy an upgraded remote. LOL!! Nobody is saying Emotiva should of provided a $50 remote. What we are saying is if they spent $3 on the remote instead of $0.75 the remote would be 10x better.. But yes..complaining about the remote is somewhat trivial given the other issues at hand... I totally agree wit this post. A decent remote would have only cost Emotiva 5-10 dollars per unit tops. The current remote looks/feels like something that would come with a kids toy, not a high performance a/v processor. |
|
|
|
Post by stuofsci02 on Apr 19, 2010 11:00:30 GMT -5
I will pass on the advice to return the UMC-1. I actually like the processor even though I believe that producing a cheap and barely adequate remote was both a mistake and a good example why democracy is often better in concept than in practice. How is this an example of democracy failing? With democracy you never please everyone, you please the majority. As this thread has shown the majority of people would rather save the money and have a cheap remote. Your view is different and I respect that, but from popular vote Emo did the right thing. |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Apr 19, 2010 11:04:24 GMT -5
LOL!! Nobody is saying Emotiva should of provided a $50 remote. What we are saying is if they spent $3 on the remote instead of $0.75 the remote would be 10x better.. But yes..complaining about the remote is somewhat trivial given the other issues at hand... I totally agree wit this post. A decent remote would have only cost Emotiva 5-10 dollars per unit tops. The current remote looks/feels like something that would come with a kids toy, not a high performance a/v processor. True, it may have cost Emo $5 to $10 but that is their cost. When you translate that to a marked up selling cost, that just adds more to the price to the consumer. I understand everyone has their preference but I would rather spend $20 less and use the remote that comes with it. At least we will have a choice very soon. |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Apr 19, 2010 11:05:22 GMT -5
I will pass on the advice to return the UMC-1. I actually like the processor even though I believe that producing a cheap and barely adequate remote was both a mistake and a good example why democracy is often better in concept than in practice. How is this an example of democracy failing? With democracy you never please everyone, you please the majority. As this thread has shown the majority of people would rather save the money and have a cheap remote. Your view is different and I respect that, but from popular vote Emo did the right thing. Rather than this having anything to do with the concept of democracy, I see this issue as having to do with the concept of "damned if you do, damned if you don't." |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 19, 2010 11:11:54 GMT -5
I will pass on the advice to return the UMC-1. I actually like the processor even though I believe that producing a cheap and barely adequate remote was both a mistake and a good example why democracy is often better in concept than in practice. How is this an example of democracy failing? With democracy you never please everyone, you please the majority. As this thread has shown the majority of people would rather save the money and have a cheap remote. Your view is different and I respect that, but from popular vote Emo did the right thing. I think what he is saying is that the people who voted, it turns out, were not really an accurate representation of all UMC owners. This is more of a flaw of polls, than of democracy lol, but I get his point. Another thing to keep in mind is that when these people voted for a cheap remote, I don't think they necessarily expected something this chincy. I know I personally never expected Emotiva to throw something like this out there. Like a said before, a couple dollars would have made a lot of difference in this case. |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 19, 2010 11:17:18 GMT -5
I totally agree wit this post. A decent remote would have only cost Emotiva 5-10 dollars per unit tops. The current remote looks/feels like something that would come with a kids toy, not a high performance a/v processor. True, it may have cost Emo $5 to $10 but that is their cost. When you translate that to a marked up selling cost, that just adds more to the price to the consumer. I understand everyone has their preference but I would rather spend $20 less and use the remote that comes with it. At least we will have a choice very soon. If Emotiva used a $10 remote (which is a high estimate of what a decent remote would cost) instead of a $1 one, they could pass that $9 dollar difference on to the customer and still make the same exact profit per unit. They wouldn't have to add $20 dollars to the price for adding $9 on to the cost. Realistically I think a few dollars more per remote would have made a big difference. |
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,494
|
Post by DYohn on Apr 19, 2010 11:19:23 GMT -5
I find myself using the Emotiva-supplied remote once in a while, and I always find that even though it is a cheap looking and feeling device that seems to weigh less than the batteries powering it, it always works and does exactly what I need it to do. Amazing.
|
|
ICBM99
Emo VIPs
When will then be now? ...Soon.
Posts: 1,702
|
Post by ICBM99 on Apr 19, 2010 11:52:07 GMT -5
The primary reason that the UMC-1 comes with the cheap looking plastic remote control is that Emotiva polled the customers during the design stage; and, the response was overwhelmingly for Emotiva to furnish a minimal cost remote control. Most of the responders stated that they already owned 3rd party universal remote controls and did NOT want a high quality remote to accompany the UMC-1. The furnished remote, although cheap looking, is surprisingly effective in the day-to-day usage of the UMC-1. As a matter of fact, it is often easier and faster to use it than to use one of the universal remotes -- particularly if you have used the switch to make the unused inputs "invisible" (as Hemster described above). Unfortunately, by listening to what the customer base so strongly stated they wanted, they have angered those customers who would have preferred the fancy aluminum "tanks" that shipped with the ERC-1. Emotiva will shortly be offering an optional aluminum remote control that has 8 discrete input buttons, as well as several other useful direct access buttons for frequently used features. No price has yet been mentioned for acquiring this optional remote control, but for those customers who don't already own universal remotes it should satisfy the "quality" complaints about the current remote. ;D I use the Harmony One, and one of the cool features is that you can adjust the button "sensitivity" and speed. So you can make the One respond just as quick as the UMC-1's own remote for fast acess. ntrain, I've got a one also, where are the settings for sensitivity and such? One thing that I've noticed after this firmware is the UMC remote is much faster, and my harmony is much slower, so adjusting those settings would be great. Thanks |
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Apr 19, 2010 18:24:53 GMT -5
The look and feel of the UMC-1s remote was not the real issue I had with it. The issue I had was if you were slightly off center of the UMC-1 it did not work. I found you had to point it directly at the UMC-1 for it to work. Not the sign of a good remote no matter what the cost/quality is.
Speaking of remotes has Emotiva shipped the updated remotes for UMC-1/USP-1 owners?
Bill
|
|
|
|
Post by monkeypimp on Apr 19, 2010 18:57:45 GMT -5
True, it may have cost Emo $5 to $10 but that is their cost. When you translate that to a marked up selling cost, that just adds more to the price to the consumer. I understand everyone has their preference but I would rather spend $20 less and use the remote that comes with it. At least we will have a choice very soon. If Emotiva used a $10 remote (which is a high estimate of what a decent remote would cost) instead of a $1 one, they could pass that $9 dollar difference on to the customer and still make the same exact profit per unit. They wouldn't have to add $20 dollars to the price for adding $9 on to the cost. Realistically I think a few dollars more per remote would have made a big difference. Sort of.... Yes they would make the same dollar profit but it would also lower the profit margin if they didn't increase the price. And if they didn't pay for all the product up front with cash and had to finance any of it, which is what many small businesses do, then they paid fees and interest possibly along with it. So it would be more than just the $9 more....and to be honest I wouldn't even want to pay the extra $9 as I don't use the remote at all so why would I even want to pay $0.50 more for it? The point is if you don't like the remote you can buy one for however much you want to spend and have the exact remote you want. |
|
|
|
Post by Woodpecker on Apr 19, 2010 19:21:16 GMT -5
I think the MAIN point has not been hit upon yet...
If Emotiva would have offered up a more fitting remote at the $700 level (Oppo BDP-83 remote comes to mind...), then Emo wouldn't have the criticism about the dollar tree remote! If it is that big of a price factor, then just say the UMC-1 is $719. I don't think another $20 or so would have made any bit of difference in a buyers decision. No talk about how cheapy the remote is, and the whole shooting match is still a great deal. Win-Win.
Aside from that, the dollar tree remote works as long as you're pretty close to the UMC. It does what it is supposed to do without looking like much. My Harmony One fills in whatever inadequacies the stocker has. What more can you say about it? And yes, I really like my UMC and will not be sending it back! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 19, 2010 19:57:10 GMT -5
If Emotiva used a $10 remote (which is a high estimate of what a decent remote would cost) instead of a $1 one, they could pass that $9 dollar difference on to the customer and still make the same exact profit per unit. They wouldn't have to add $20 dollars to the price for adding $9 on to the cost. Realistically I think a few dollars more per remote would have made a big difference. Sort of.... Yes they would make the same dollar profit but it would also lower the profit margin if they didn't increase the price. And if they didn't pay for all the product up front with cash and had to finance any of it, which is what many small businesses do, then they paid fees and interest possibly along with it. So it would be more than just the $9 more....and to be honest I wouldn't even want to pay the extra $9 as I don't use the remote at all so why would I even want to pay $0.50 more for it? The point is if you don't like the remote you can buy one for however much you want to spend and have the exact remote you want. point taken. I still think that most people would be happier if the UMC would have been priced $5 higher and came with a decent remote. I know that you don't use yours, but I'm talking in general. Doing a quick google search for universal remotes, I came up with a number of remotes that look to be a higher quality than the one that came with the UMC for less than $3 retail, so we are talking very small price differences here. |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,099
|
Post by klinemj on Apr 19, 2010 20:21:32 GMT -5
On the remote itself, I'm one of those guys who tends to use the factory remote instead of getting a universal one. So, I have several laying next to my seat in my HT (and a nice little drawer holds all those not in use at the moment). One for AVR, 1 for DVD, 1 for BluRay, 1 for projector, 1 for USP-1, 1 for DirecTV...and 1 for...what the hell is that for?
Personally, I actually like my USP-1's remote (which if you look at it is a very close cousin...too close actually...of the UMC-1's remote). As some have noted, it is small, very light, and it works really well. Sure, it looks cheap if you compare to some others, but I like it.
In fact, if it were not for the code overlap issue w/the USP and UMC remotes, I would be fine w/the UMC's. It is small, light, simple, and effective. The new remote which also fixes the code overlap is certainly nice, but it is also large/heavy vs. the original. Given it will be one of the main ones that stays out on top of the stand next to my seat in my HT, I suppose that's "ok". But the current one would be "ok" w/me also.
Finally - to bborzell...by my comment re. "return it if you don't like it", sorry if that bugged you. I was not intending that as any negative or slight to you. My key point was really that the type of remote than came with the UMC-1 had been broadly known for a long time. For any major purchase (and I consider a $700 purchase a major one...), I presume people check into any details that are key to them before purchasing. And, if they don't and later find something not to their liking, well...that's not the manufacturer's fault. In the csae of Emotiva, they have a great return policy, so returning things if there's ANYTHING you don't like is an option. Now, in general, I suppose if the manufacturer was hiding something, then yes...that's not good. But - I don't see that as the case here.
And by the way...if people want to see a cheap remote (on a $ for device/$ for remote basis)...check out the remote for a Panny AE4000 projector. It's of similar quality to the UMC's but the AE4000 costs $2000. But, I'm not complaining...love my AE4000!
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Apr 19, 2010 20:29:04 GMT -5
+1, the remote on my Mitsubishi HC5000 is a piece of junk, works intermittently etc. (but does have a backlight which sort of helps read the buttons) and the HC5000 cost over 3000 EUROS when new.
The Harmony does the trick though.
|
|
|
|
Post by moe on Apr 19, 2010 20:32:50 GMT -5
It's pretty well understood the remote looks cheap and is cheap.My remote works fine , although seldom used.I programed my Harmony and used the umc remote to program my mx500.How does anyone run a HT set up without a bare minimum $10 learning remote?
So you really care about sound,you didn't buy that cheapo avr and you got a whoopass amp,now you want to run it all with 5 remotes?You're not diggin' the HT rig enough to buy a $10 universal/learning remote?I bought my mx500 for $40,my Harmony for $30.I bought a phillips learning for my garage $10.
I would have liked the UMC to have a decent remote,add $20 like mustang said,I'd be really happy with that.Well....Emotiva will offer a remote for the UMC,they did listen and are trying to satisfy that request.This whole thread is about creating drama because everyone saw the remote before buying if they wanted to.To look at something, then buy it ,then complain about how it looks is kinda odd to me.
|
|
