UMC-1 is a giant killer (885P A/B info, too)

[moe]

You have a point Bill,whenever I speak of the UMC I am always thinking of 2 channel.I should always point out that my main thing for a prepro is, that it can do really good 2 channel music.For HT the UMC is good but in that comparison it has competition, all things considered.For 2 channel you really have to step up to beat it in a prepro, of course just my opinion.

[jdskycaster]

For HT use I think you also have to consider features. By that I mean features that are important to you. For me I auditioned the Pioneer Elite and an Onkyo AVR beside the UMC-1. These units both had processing features that the UMC-1 does not have. Unfortunately they also lacked important features that are more important to me. The OSD on the UMC-1 is much better and in the case of the Pioneer Elites is completely missing altogether.

Even though they both have proven advanced room correction systems that work the UMC-1 does offer the ability to tweak while listening to any source. So given the fact that the UMC-1 is impressive in the 2ch category I also believe it is no slouch for HT as well, it just depends on what features matter most to you.

JD

[visiter555]

Apr 27, 2010 20:27:52 GMT -5 billmac said:

My thoughts on the UMC-1 and 885 comparison is that they are both excellent prepros. They both excel in different areas and I guess you have to decide which features and qualities you desire. The UMC-1 is very strong on 2 CH SQ performance and does HT very well. The 885 I feel is excellent at handling HT duties including video processing but 2 CH SQ performance is not on a par with the UMC-1. For someone to say the 885 and UMC-1 sound the same for 2 CH SQ with either a analog or digital input has not listened to either one.

To be honest the Giant Killer name does not fit as I do not consider the 885 to be a Giant of a prepro. It is a great prepro as I owned one and now own the 886. As far as features go the 886 is better than the 885 but SQ they are very similar if not identical. The slight improvement that the 886 might have is a better calibration mic for Audyssey which is said to give better calibration results although YMMV . For that matter I do not consider the 886 a Giant of a prepro either but again a very good one.

IMO if the UMC-1 outclassed the Anthem AVM 50v/D2v, Classe SSP800, Denon AVP-1HD or the Arcam AV888 for both SQ and features then it would be a big time Giant Killer. But the 885 now goes for $700-800 and the 886 goes for $900-1100 which is not that much more expensive than the UMC-1 especially if the price climbs to possibly $799. So unless you really desire 2 CH SQ performance with more of an emphasis towards HT usage then the difference between the UMC-1 and the 885/886 is not that big IMO. I'm in no way slamming the UMC-1 just trying to give a different prespective from someone who has owned both at the same time .

Bill

Bill,

I would have to agree with you on your choices. I have had the Anthem in my rack and was happy with it for the most part (well, not with the price). I have found the Rotel 1570 to be close to the UMC in price (paid under $1400 cdn for the Rotel heavily discounted) and the UMC hits the streets here at $855 plus exchange (say $900 with cc & exchange). It is a 50% increade on the UMC price, but it is still in the same "buyer" range to me.

That was the cheapest pre/pro I could think of, and I am not going to compare AVRs to the UMC.

Vis

[moe]

The Rotel is no slouch compared to other prepro's that cost more.I've owned Rotels off and on many years,always happy.I paid $439 for the UMC delivered,that puts it in a catagory that no one but Emotiva owns.I think one thing that is consistently overlooked is this unit comes with a bonus, a big one.

[BillBauman]

BillMac makes excellent points. I appreciate his views. Rotel also makes excellent gear, as many of us here have agreed. I haven't heard their modern pre/pro's, though. For 2-channel SQ, the UMC-1 is unreal, especially for all of us running digital sources like HTPC, WD Live, Popcorn's, etc.

[NorthStar]

^ I agree, Bill Mac has a good head on his shoulders, and his posts deserve attention.

[khonfused]

Since my focus lies on 2ch music more than on HT, I guess I will go for it, when my number comes up. Your positive comments on the audiophile qualities just makes me curious. I hope you guys didn't let me down. Returning the unit from Germany would be a bit more expensive than from within the US.
I am happy with my Yamaha AVR as a pre/pro connected to a XPA5, but I would just be restless if I didn't do it.
I just hope most of the bugs are fixed before duty calls.

[billmac]

Apr 27, 2010 20:44:28 GMT -5 moe said:

You have a point Bill,whenever I speak of the UMC I am always thinking of 2 channel.I should always point out that my main thing for a prepro is, that it can do really good 2 channel music.For HT the UMC is good but in that comparison it has competition, all things considered.For 2 channel you really have to step up to beat it in a prepro, of course just my opinion.

moe,

You are right in that you really have to jump up quite a bit in cost to get a prepro with the UMC-1's 2 CH SQ. I am hoping Emotiva reopens the XMC-1 preorder list as I would really like to try it in my system when it is released .

Bill

[billmac]

Apr 27, 2010 21:02:29 GMT -5 jdskycaster said:

For HT use I think you also have to consider features. By that I mean features that are important to you. For me I auditioned the Pioneer Elite and an Onkyo AVR beside the UMC-1. These units both had processing features that the UMC-1 does not have. Unfortunately they also lacked important features that are more important to me. The OSD on the UMC-1 is much better and in the case of the Pioneer Elites is completely missing altogether.

JD,

No better way to find out if a component is for you than to try it in your system. As you found out with the Pioneer and the Onkyo that they had some features the UMC-1 did not have but they did not have features that really mattered to you. I forgot how good the OSD is with the UMC-1. I found that out quickly when I went back to my 886 and brought up the OSD and it shifts to straight OSD with no transparency . A very nice feature of the UMC-1 without a doubt .

Even though they both have proven advanced room correction systems that work the UMC-1 does offer the ability to tweak while listening to any source. So given the fact that the UMC-1 is impressive in the 2ch category I also believe it is no slouch for HT as well, it just depends on what features matter most to you.

I'm not much of a tweaker so this is what swayed me back to the 886. But having the tweakability of the UMC-1 is an excellent feature if you enjoy setting up your system manually. Its too bad the Audyssey implemation in the 886 did not allow more flexability to manually tweak the settings. There is always Audyssey Pro but I'm happy with the standard MultEQ XT version . But as you say its the features that you desire that mean the most no matter what others might think.

Bill

[billmac]

Apr 27, 2010 21:45:36 GMT -5 visiter555 said:

I would have to agree with you on your choices. I have had the Anthem in my rack and was happy with it for the most part (well, not with the price). I have found the Rotel 1570 to be close to the UMC in price (paid under $1400 cdn for the Rotel heavily discounted) and the UMC hits the streets here at $855 plus exchange (say $900 with cc & exchange). It is a 50% increade on the UMC price, but it is still in the same "buyer" range to me.

That was the cheapest pre/pro I could think of, and I am not going to compare AVRs to the UMC.

Vis

Vis,

I had a AVM 30 in my system for about 6 months and really enjoyed its SQ and its features. The tweakability for a design that is at least 5-6 years old is quite amazing. I thought the ability to apply DSP functions to the 5.1 MC input was a great option as well as the Anthem Logic DSP mode. I am very interested on what features the new Anthem AVRs will have as I would not hesitate to try one in my system as a prepro.

The Rotels are also great units when it comes to SQ but with no form of room correction I did not consider them as an option.

Bill

[billmac]

Apr 27, 2010 23:15:20 GMT -5 BillBauman said:

BillMac makes excellent points. I appreciate his views. Rotel also makes excellent gear, as many of us here have agreed. I haven't heard their modern pre/pro's, though. For 2-channel SQ, the UMC-1 is unreal, especially for all of us running digital sources like HTPC, WD Live, Popcorn's, etc.

Bill,

Thanks for the kind words ! You most certainly have helped many with Emonatics and with my lack of computer skills I would have needed assistance for sure if I was updating the UMC-1 .

Bill

[billmac]

Apr 27, 2010 23:20:31 GMT -5 NorthStar said:

^ I agree, Bill Mac has a good head on his shoulders, and his posts deserve attention.

Bob,

Thanks for the kind words as well . I'm certainly not the most knowledgeable A/V person around here but I try to look a both sides of this hobby of ours.

Bill

[bborzell]

While I am becoming incrementally more impressed with the overall performance of the UMC-1 in my system (after having replaced the Leggo remote with a Harmony One), the one area where the UMC-1 really outperforms my Rotel RSP-1066 is in the sound quality over Zone 2.

I have 8 sets of speakers (with impedance matching volume controls) distributed around the house which have been driven by amps ranging from 75 watts per channel to 200 watts per channel when the Rotel was in the rack. Under the best of circumstances, the Zone 2 performance was adequate ambiance sound, sort of like background music in a clothing store.

After putting the UMC-1 into the chain, Zone 2 sound has improved to the point where there is both clear detail and a much greater range of volume from the speakers, even when all are driven at the same time, that I was able to go back the the 75 watt amp.

While the UMC-1 has improved all aspects of video and audio in my system, the Zone 2 change is remarkable.

[ratmice]

That's good to hear. I just got around to hooking up the patio speakers to zone 2. Now that the weather is getting nice, in New England, I can't wait to put them through their paces.

[Nemesis.ie]

Apr 28, 2010 3:00:12 GMT -5 khonfused said:

Since my focus lies on 2ch music more than on HT, I guess I will go for it, when my number comes up. Your positive comments on the audiophile qualities just makes me curious. I hope you guys didn't let me down. Returning the unit from Germany would be a bit more expensive than from within the US.
I am happy with my Yamaha AVR as a pre/pro connected to a XPA5, but I would just be restless if I didn't do it.
I just hope most of the bugs are fixed before duty calls.

Which Yamaha is it? You will probably be pleasantly surprised.

[NorthStar]

Apr 28, 2010 6:25:15 GMT -5 billmac said:

Apr 27, 2010 20:44:28 GMT -5 moe said:

You have a point Bill,whenever I speak of the UMC I am always thinking of 2 channel.I should always point out that my main thing for a prepro is, that it can do really good 2 channel music.For HT the UMC is good but in that comparison it has competition, all things considered.For 2 channel you really have to step up to beat it in a prepro, of course just my opinion.

moe,

You are right in that you really have to jump up quite a bit in cost to get a prepro with the UMC-1's 2 CH SQ. I am hoping Emotiva reopens the XMC-1 preorder list as I would really like to try it in my system when it is released .

Bill

Ditto!

[greentea123]

My thought on UMC...

I have Marantz av-9000 and rotel 1095 combo for years and I thought I had pretty good setup for both music and HT. Then new formats come out which require HDMI, and I thought damn... I need to come up few grands (getting wife approve on $$ is alway a huge challenge) for a new pre/pro to catch up the latest format and worry not getting the same quality sound that I alway had. Did my research and found out emotiva and then checked most of the reviews of their products were good. Took a chance on XPA-2 (planning on 7.2 setup) because of the UMC-1 wasn't available yet and turned out the XPA-2 better than expected. Get the UMC-1 as soon as my number was up, hooked it up and all my worries on not getting as good sound as my marantz were gone!!! Sound quality wise, UMC-1 beat my marantz in every way that I could imagine. Even my wife heard the noticeable difference. And the best part was, it only cost me $900 cdn total which was much easier to go through my wife on this expense than some other pre/pro that I was planning to get. There are still bugs need to be fix on UMC otherwise I am very very happy with my UMC. My setup is simple so I am still on V5 FW without much of the problems.

So IMHO if the UMC-1 is not grant killer I don't know what other pre/pro is with such price/performance ratio...

PS, in case you want to bring up the ONKYO 886 or 885 comparsion again. I did try to get the 886 when it was $999 from shoponkyo and UMC-1 wasn't available yet, however, the rep from shoponkyo don't even sell it to me (I asked them to ship within local US UPS store) since I don't have US address credit card.

[NorthStar]

^ Great post from another Canadian.

[khonfused]

Apr 28, 2010 12:36:12 GMT -5 Nemesis.ie said:

Apr 28, 2010 3:00:12 GMT -5 khonfused said:

Since my focus lies on 2ch music more than on HT, I guess I will go for it, when my number comes up. Your positive comments on the audiophile qualities just makes me curious. I hope you guys didn't let me down. Returning the unit from Germany would be a bit more expensive than from within the US.
I am happy with my Yamaha AVR as a pre/pro connected to a XPA5, but I would just be restless if I didn't do it.
I just hope most of the bugs are fixed before duty calls.

Which Yamaha is it? You will probably be pleasantly surprised.

It`s a Yamaha 1700 (around 3 yrs. old now), the sound quality improved a lot already when using it as a pre only and connecting it to the xpa-5. My new speakers had a huge impact as well. I went from Infinity Kappas 7.2 to Nubert NuWave 125 (not sure this company is even known in the US) www.nubert.de/

[Nemesis.ie]

Apr 29, 2010 3:53:23 GMT -5 khonfused said:

Apr 28, 2010 12:36:12 GMT -5 Nemesis.ie said:

Which Yamaha is it? You will probably be pleasantly surprised.

It`s a Yamaha 1700 (around 3 yrs. old now), the sound quality improved a lot already when using it as a pre only and connecting it to the xpa-5. My new speakers had a huge impact as well. I went from Infinity Kappas 7.2 to Nubert NuWave 125 (not sure this company is even known in the US) www.nubert.de/

Mine was a similar vintage - RX-V2500 and I also noticed a subtle/incremental improvement going to an XPA-5, then another to 3 x UPA-1 up front, the UMC-1 is a DRAMATIC improvement and that's on top of the previous incremental ones.

Surround sounds are so much better positioned in space and with better clarity.

(and believe me, after the incremental ones I was VERY sceptical, the main reason I got the UMC-1 was for HDMI support, HD audio and reduced electricity use from the Yamaha amps sitting idle)