|
|
Post by powerwindow on Apr 21, 2010 14:23:25 GMT -5
I have not had time to look in to it, but was hoping on our forum members' expertise. Are recently abandoned pre/pro platforms ie Outlaw, Parasound based on the same DSP Chipset utilized in the UMC-1? If so, is the UMC-1, Cary 11-a, and Krell the only products moving forward with this architecture? It makes me a little leary if companies are walking away from something they have spent years in developing, based on hardware issues and I am considering purchasing a product with that same hardware. I know their walking away does not mean there is no hope for a stable product, but it does make me wonder if there is hope? Did Emotiva pass their point of no return and trying to make the best of what they have, while not reaching their anticiapted design? Trust me, I want it to work. I am very happy with their products and want to "keep things in the family,: so to speak, but I'm just curious.
Thanks for your input,
Sips
|
|
htmtl
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 205
|
Post by htmtl on Apr 21, 2010 14:41:49 GMT -5
well, here is something else that base on the same platform and i quote
"The long awaited PT-7020A pre/pro processor is now shipping. With a mind numbing array of features, it will undoubtedly be the finest product introduced to date by Sherbourn. No feature has been left out and the Twin Cirrus® 32 bit dual core DSP’s will produce a startlingly exquisite cinema experience. Last Updated on Sunday, 07 March 2010 20:35 "
|
|
|
|
Post by debk on Apr 21, 2010 14:51:23 GMT -5
Isn't that basically a UMC-1 with balanced outputs
Debra
|
|
htmtl
Emo VIPs
Posts: 205
|
Post by htmtl on Apr 21, 2010 15:03:09 GMT -5
shuuuuuuutttttt ;-) you can not said that ..... LOL
I was wondering how is their FIRMWARE doing ... anyone?
|
|
|
|
Post by moodyman on Apr 21, 2010 15:13:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by roadrunner on Apr 21, 2010 15:18:05 GMT -5
Isn't that basically a UMC-1 with balanced outputs Debra You are quite right, Debra. The Sherbourn unit is a clone of the UMC-1. When I downloaded their user manual a couple of months ago, it was word for word the same as the UMC-1 user manual, with references to Emtotiva UMC-1 being replaced with the appropriate Sherbourn PT-7020A. The abandonded Outlaw product did not use the Cirrus chips. I have no idea what the Parasound's chp was. As of late last year, the Cary, Krell and Emotiva pre/pros were the only A/V processors using the dual Cirrus chip solution. There may be others now, but I have not seen anything other than the new Denon A/V processor. Denon's flag-ship pre-pro is using the same Cirrus chip. |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 21, 2010 15:24:01 GMT -5
Isn't that basically a UMC-1 with balanced outputs Debra You are quite right, Debra. The Sherbourn unit is a clone of the UMC-1. When I downloaded their user manual a couple of months ago, it was word for word the same as the UMC-1 user manual, with references to Emtotiva UMC-1 being replaced with the appropriate Sherbourn PT-7020A. The abandonded Outlaw product did not use the Cirrus chips. I have no idea what the Parasound's chp was. As of late last year, the Cary, Krell and Emotiva pre/pros were the only A/V processors using the dual Cirrus chip solution. There may be others now, but I have not seen anything other than the new Denon A/V processor. Denon's flag-ship pre-pro is using the same Cirrus chip. Ronnie, a couple things. Wasn't the pre-abandoned Outlaw processor based on the Cirrus chips, and then they switched to something else, then they announced the recently "we give up" strategy? Also, which Denon Pre/Pro is using the Cirrus DSP's? The AVP-A1HDCI claims: Processor(s) – Bit Depth and Type 3 - 21366 x 1 and 21367 x 2 32-bit Floating Point. Is there a different one, or am I missing something on this one? |
|
|
|
Post by powerwindow on Apr 21, 2010 15:25:53 GMT -5
The word on the street is that the Parasound unit was based on the UMC-1 platform. However it had balanced outputs and licensed Audessey. No matter..Parasound bailed on it. I saw this mentioned in a post on this forum and that is what prompted me to start this thread. Are we maybe seeing why they bailed based on the UMC's early performance? The thing that troubles me is would they bail if they knew the platform could be stable w/ FW updates? Or does their bailing indicate a lost cause? |
|
|
|
Post by moodyman on Apr 21, 2010 15:27:39 GMT -5
You are quite right, Debra. The Sherbourn unit is a clone of the UMC-1. When I downloaded their user manual a couple of months ago, it was word for word the same as the UMC-1 user manual, with references to Emtotiva UMC-1 being replaced with the appropriate Sherbourn PT-7020A. The abandonded Outlaw product did not use the Cirrus chips. I have no idea what the Parasound's chp was. As of late last year, the Cary, Krell and Emotiva pre/pros were the only A/V processors using the dual Cirrus chip solution. There may be others now, but I have not seen anything other than the new Denon A/V processor. Denon's flag-ship pre-pro is using the same Cirrus chip. Ronnie, a couple things. Wasn't the pre-abandoned Outlaw processor based on the Cirrus chips, and then they switched to something else, then they announced the recently "we give up" strategy? Also, which Denon Pre/Pro is using the Cirrus DSP's? The AVP-A1HDCI claims: Processor(s) – Bit Depth and Type 3 - 21366 x 1 and 21367 x 2 32-bit Floating Point. Is there a different one, or am I missing something on this one? The Outlaw processor was going to be a spinoff of a Sherwood receiver with some kind of new auto EQ program (Trinnitov). Sherword had lots of probelms and Outlaw didn't want to wait anymore... |
|
|
|
Post by moodyman on Apr 21, 2010 15:29:31 GMT -5
The word on the street is that the Parasound unit was based on the UMC-1 platform. However it had balanced outputs and licensed Audessey. No matter..Parasound bailed on it. I saw this mentioned in a post on this forum and that is what prompted me to start this thread. Are we maybe seeing why they bailed based on the UMC's early performance? The thing that troubles me is would they bail if they knew the platform could be stable w/ FW updates? Or does their bailing indicate a lost cause? Makes you wonder doesn't it ?? |
|
|
|
Post by jasonf on Apr 21, 2010 15:46:09 GMT -5
Also, which Denon Pre/Pro is using the Cirrus DSP's? The AVP-A1HDCI claims: Processor(s) – Bit Depth and Type 3 - 21366 x 1 and 21367 x 2 32-bit Floating Point. Is there a different one, or am I missing something on this one? The Denon uses (multiple) Analog Devices SHARC processors. |
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator 
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,864
|
Post by LCSeminole on Apr 21, 2010 15:54:20 GMT -5
The chassis is the same, but there are too many differences in placement of inputs/outputs/rs 232/usbs/triggers/component/balanced sub output as well as what you've already mentioned on Audyssey. Similar but not similar. Obviously some of the boards would not be the same, but it does make one stop and compare closely. |
|
|
|
Post by moe on Apr 21, 2010 15:57:32 GMT -5
I never have to wonder, just fire up the UMC and enjoy the fantastic sound.
|
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,864
|
Post by LCSeminole on Apr 21, 2010 16:05:04 GMT -5
I never have to wonder, just fire up the UMC and enjoy the fantastic sound. Totally agree, I've been running my ERC-1 through the UMC-1 and have been pleasantly surprised at the sound quality.  |
|
|
|
Post by rogerm on Apr 21, 2010 16:17:26 GMT -5
I have not had time to look in to it, but was hoping on our forum members' expertise. Are recently abandoned pre/pro platforms ie Outlaw, Parasound based on the same DSP Chipset utilized in the UMC-1? If so, is the UMC-1, Cary 11-a, and Krell the only products moving forward with this architecture? It makes me a little leary if companies are walking away from something they have spent years in developing, based on hardware issues and I am considering purchasing a product with that same hardware. I know their walking away does not mean there is no hope for a stable product, but it does make me wonder if there is hope? Did Emotiva pass their point of no return and trying to make the best of what they have, while not reaching their anticiapted design? Trust me, I want it to work. I am very happy with their products and want to "keep things in the family,: so to speak, but I'm just curious. Thanks for your input, Sips Harman Kardon's 3600 AVR, among others in their new lineup and the new Cambridge Audio Azur 650 AVR are two mfgs that use the dual Cirrus chips. |
|
|
|
Post by powerwindow on Apr 21, 2010 17:35:42 GMT -5
M I never have to wonder, just fire up the UMC and enjoy the fantastic sound. This is my hope and the fact that the chip is being implemented in other mfgr's product makes my hope that much stronger. |
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Apr 21, 2010 18:14:23 GMT -5
Denon's flag-ship pre-pro is using the same Cirrus chip. The AVP-A1HDCI does not use the Cirrus chip that the UMC-1 has. The AVP-A1HDCI uses Analog Devices SHARC DSPs as stated earlier. Bill |
|
bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Apr 21, 2010 18:17:55 GMT -5
M I never have to wonder, just fire up the UMC and enjoy the fantastic sound. This is my hope and the fact that the chip is being implemented in other mfgr's product makes my hope that much stronger. It's not just the chipset that determines overall sound quality. IMHO, the analog circuitry and power supply implementation has much more to do with SQ than say vendor "A"'s chipset over vendor "B"'s. It is the attention to the analog side (including power) that would give the UMC it's excellent SQ. In that regard, I have no doubt in Emotiva's engineering expertise. |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 21, 2010 18:24:44 GMT -5
M This is my hope and the fact that the chip is being implemented in other mfgr's product makes my hope that much stronger. It's not just the chipset that determines overall sound quality. IMHO, the analog circuitry and power supply implementation has much more to do with SQ than say vendor "A"'s chipset over vendor "B"'s. It is the attention to the analog side (including power) that would give the UMC it's excellent SQ. In that regard, I have no doubt in Emotiva's engineering expertise. bootman, I agree. I am pretty outspoken about my general dislike of Cirrus DAC (Crystal Semiconductor, to be fair). That said, the UMC-1 has fantastic sound. I may not love the DAC it uses, but the analog section is pretty dreamy. |
|
|
|
Post by powerwindow on Apr 21, 2010 19:03:36 GMT -5
It's not just the chipset that determines overall sound quality. IMHO, the analog circuitry and power supply implementation has much more to do with SQ than say vendor "A"'s chipset over vendor "B"'s. It is the attention to the analog side (including power) that would give the UMC it's excellent SQ. In that regard, I have no doubt in Emotiva's engineering expertise. Bootman, I totally agree w/ you and although I don't have one yet, the overall feeling I get about the UMC's SQ from posts is that it's excellent. However, and I may be wrong, but I thought the Cirrus chips are for sound processing of different audio streams and the CS chip is the DAC. If the Cirrus chip has some sort of flaw causing the issues UMC owners are experiencing, and mfgr's bailing, many may walk away regardless of how good the UMC sounds. That's why I'm curious what other machines are using the Cirrus chips and how they are performing. The fact that the UMC sounds so good to most is why I am still very interested in it. I'm also optimistic that issues can be dealt w/ FW updates. I would also be more optimistic if there were some other successful implementations of the Cirrus DSP. |
|
