|
|
Post by dsnyder0cnn on Apr 8, 2011 8:36:57 GMT -5
...It might be advantageous for you (as well as others) to get on the phone with EMO at your first opportunity and get some hard core clarification of what is really coming out of the HP outputs in HT Bypass mode. You're in Atlanta...not far from Nashville, and you have 30 days to kill with the USP-1. It's an awfully nice sounding unit as you've discovered, and it would be a shame for an element of ambiguity in the wording of the manual to lead people astray. I've written audio component user manuals, and it's not easy to get it 100%!! It's worth a few minutes on the phone I'd imagine. Agreed. I actually did call Emotiva...twice. On my first call, I asked to speak with technical support. When I explained that there is no signal on the full range outputs when the HT Bypass input is selected, he asked me how the USP-1 was connected. When I described how the front L/R outputs from the UMC-1 run to the HT Bypass inputs on the USP-1 and the full range outputs on the USP-1 run to my front channel power amp, he said that this was not normally how the USP-1 and UMC-1 are used together. He said that it would be better to let the UMC-1 drive the power amps and connect the USP-1 to one of the UMC-1's inputs. When I objected, stating that the USP-1 should sound better than the UMC-1, he said that this is not true. They both have the same output stage and sound identical. Folks use the USP-1 for it's phono stage, but the UMC-1 is much more powerful. At that point, I just didn't know what to say. He didn't seem to be aware of the full range output limitation, so I didn't bother asking him for other workarounds to my problem. I thanked him for his time, hung-up, hit re-dial and asked to speak to sales. Vince (I think that's the right name) was very much aware of the disabled full range outputs issue with the USP-1 since he owns one as well as the UMC-1. He also prefers full-range fronts, so his workaround was to build completely separate systems in different rooms. In my case, he suggested that I run the front left/right outputs on the UMC-1 to the "AUX 1" input on the USP-1 and then take my best guess at a unity gain volume setting on the USP-1 when it's time to watch movies. Another very helpful person on this forum actually used TruRTA to plot the frequency response of the USP-1's high pass outputs with the crossover nob at several different settings. At the lowest setting (~50Hz), the high pass outputs are down about 4dB at 30Hz and 7dB at 20Hz. Since most music has little content below 40Hz, he suggested that I try just using the high pass outputs, with or without the sub powered on. Most people who have done this don't even notice that their fronts are not running full-range since the bass roll-off is so gradual. I still have not decided what I'm going to do, but I am genuinely annoyed at the USP-1's designers for disabling the full-range outputs when the HT Bypass input is selected. Even Vince was unable to come up with a reason for their doing this. It does nothing to simplify the use of the device and only limits its applications. This is not even a product positioning play since the XSP-1 won't be available until years after the introduction of the USP-1. I just don't get it!!! I'm told that this issue has been discussed elsewhere in these pages, but hopefully my discussion here will help to inform perspective buyers of the USP-1 about it's only serious weakness. It's otherwise an astonishingly good product that I can recommend without hesitation to just about any music and home theater enthusiast with front speakers that are more than three dB down at 40 Hz. Folks with full-range fronts who prefer to listen to music without a sub will do better to wait for the XSP-1 or look elsewhere. Cheers. -- David |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Apr 8, 2011 9:27:10 GMT -5
...It might be advantageous for you (as well as others) to get on the phone with EMO at your first opportunity and get some hard core clarification of what is really coming out of the HP outputs in HT Bypass mode. You're in Atlanta...not far from Nashville, and you have 30 days to kill with the USP-1. It's an awfully nice sounding unit as you've discovered, and it would be a shame for an element of ambiguity in the wording of the manual to lead people astray. I've written audio component user manuals, and it's not easy to get it 100%!! It's worth a few minutes on the phone I'd imagine. Agreed. I actually did call Emotiva...twice. On my first call, I asked to speak with technical support. When I explained that there is no signal on the full range outputs when the HT Bypass input is selected, he asked me how the USP-1 was connected. When I described how the front L/R outputs from the UMC-1 run to the HT Bypass inputs on the USP-1 and the full range outputs on the USP-1 run to my front channel power amp, he said that this was not normally how the USP-1 and UMC-1 are used together. He said that it would be better to let the UMC-1 drive the power amps and connect the USP-1 to one of the UMC-1's inputs. When I objected, stating that the USP-1 should sound better than the UMC-1, he said that this is not true. They both have the same output stage and sound identical. Folks use the USP-1 for it's phono stage, but the UMC-1 is much more powerful. At that point, I just didn't know what to say. He didn't seem to be aware of the full range output limitation, so I didn't bother asking him for other workarounds to my problem. I thanked him for his time, hung-up, hit re-dial and asked to speak to sales. Vince (I think that's the right name) was very much aware of the disabled full range outputs issue with the USP-1 since he owns one as well as the UMC-1. He also prefers full-range fronts, so his workaround was to build completely separate systems in different rooms. In my case, he suggested that I run the front left/right outputs on the UMC-1 to the "AUX 1" input on the USP-1 and then take my best guess at a unity gain volume setting on the USP-1 when it's time to watch movies. Another very helpful person on this forum actually used TruRTA to plot the frequency response of the USP-1's high pass outputs with the crossover nob at several different settings. At the lowest setting (~50Hz), the high pass outputs are down about 4dB at 30Hz and 7dB at 20Hz. Since most music has little content below 40Hz, he suggested that I try just using the high pass outputs, with or without the sub powered on. Most people who have done this don't even notice that their fronts are not running full-range since the bass roll-off is so gradual. I still have not decided what I'm going to do, but I am genuinely annoyed at the USP-1's designers for disabling the full-range outputs when the HT Bypass input is selected. Even Vince was unable to come up with a reason for their doing this. It does nothing to simplify the use of the device and only limits its applications. This is not even a product positioning play since the XSP-1 won't be available until years after the introduction of the USP-1. I just don't get it!!! I'm told that this issue has been discussed elsewhere in these pages, but hopefully my discussion here will help to inform perspective buyers of the USP-1 about it's only serious weakness. It's otherwise an astonishingly good product that I can recommend without hesitation to just about any music and home theater enthusiast with front speakers that are more than three dB down at 40 Hz. Folks with full-range fronts who prefer to listen to music without a sub will do better to wait for the XSP-1 or look elsewhere. Cheers. -- David It seems your main misfortune is having arrived late in the game regarding this "defect" in the USP-1. There was quite a flurry of discussion soon after its release as everyone pretty much had the same reaction you did - "huh???!!!  " I agree, it makes no sense. Lonnie's explanation was that if people were using the pass through inputs then that must mean they were playing their home theaters, and HT always uses a subwoofer. Anyway, those were some helpful ideas you posted. I use a sub so the issue isn't a big one for me but I certainly understand yours and everyone else's frustration who would like to use the fronts full range when running HT. |
|
|
|
Post by stuofsci02 on Apr 8, 2011 10:02:21 GMT -5
David, Please see link.. emotivalounge.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=preampdac&thread=15956&page=1On thing that you have said that isn't quite true is that in HT bypass you will not get the bass management of the USP-1. In HT bypass what goes in the HT bypass L/R mains comes out the output to the Amp. What goes in the HT bypass sub in, goes out the sub output. This is because the HT Bypass tie ins are after the crossover. In order for Emo to have correctly allow bypass to either the highpass outs or the full range outs they would have needed to put a selector switch on the back to select where the HT bypass input connect to. Would have been very easy. Design flaw IMO... |
|
|
|
Post by stuofsci02 on Apr 8, 2011 10:03:16 GMT -5
I also agree, the USP-1 sounds amazing for the money...
|
|
|
|
Post by dsnyder0cnn on Apr 8, 2011 11:22:49 GMT -5
Hello, On thing that you have said that isn't quite true is that in HT bypass you will not get the bass management of the USP-1. In HT bypass what goes in the HT bypass L/R mains comes out the output to the Amp. What goes in the HT bypass sub in, goes out the sub output. This is because the HT Bypass tie ins are after the crossover. In order for Emo to have correctly allow bypass to either the highpass outs or the full range outs they would have needed to put a selector switch on the back to select where the HT bypass input connect to. Would have been very easy. Design flaw IMO... Thanks for the correction. Very interesting. This should be easy for me to verify using TruRTA and my E-MU 0404 USB audio interface to run some sweeps through the HT Bypass inputs, so I guess I'll do that just to see for myself. I can imagine how this might be a lower cost way to implement an HT Bypass and how this approach could make it harder to keep the full range outputs active (the HT Bypass literally bypasses the signal path that includes the volume control, crossovers, and full range outputs). In addition to cost control, the advantage is that the signal path is as short as possible in HT Bypass mode. Perhaps this was as good as they could do at this price point? From the perspective of the consumer, this behavior is not obvious from the product description, and pages 11 and 14 in the manual seem to be contradictory. I remain super bummed, but I'm slightly less angry with the USP-1's designers since what you have said helps me to understand how they may have arrived at this design. Thanks. -- David |
|
|
|
Post by hobbs on Apr 8, 2011 11:44:17 GMT -5
There is no need to throw the baby with the bath water! You can keep both USP-1 and UMC-1. Use an audio source selector: TCC TC-716 from www.phonopreamps.com/tc716pp.html. And it costs $27.50. Also available on Amazon, I believe.    "This model allows you to connect up to five stereo aux level sources to one input. One or five or any combination in between can be selected to mix and play at once. Unused inputs can be "reversed" and used as outputs to additional amps or recording devices. Four jack sets are RCA type; the remaining two are 3.5mm stereo minijacks (the kind found on Discmen and MP3 players). Now available in both BLACK and SILVER finishes!" |
|
|
|
Post by dsnyder0cnn on Apr 8, 2011 13:10:10 GMT -5
There is no need to throw the baby with the bath water! You can keep both USP-1 and UMC-1. Use an audio source selector: TCC TC-716 from www.phonopreamps.com/tc716pp.html. And it costs $27.50. Also available on Amazon, I believe. Hahaha. My purpose in adding the USP-1 to the mix was enhance enjoyment of two channel music playback by having a shorter and more pure signal path. Whatever I gained by routing music through USP-1 would surely be lost (and more) by inserting a second pair of interconnects and a $27 source selector between the UMC-1/USP-1 and my front power amp. Well, that and a second pair of LAT International IC-200 MkII's will set me back $325 in addition to the cost of the selector. LOL. Thanks for the suggestion though. Still deciding if I should send this thing back or if I might have some use for it in a second system once the XSP-1 is in the house. Cheers. -- David |
|
|
|
Post by dsnyder0cnn on Apr 8, 2011 13:17:40 GMT -5
I like pro-audio gear because it usually comes with a block diagram that shows how signals are routed. Buyers and audio engineers can just have a quick look to understand exactly how things work. Here's my attempt at a very simplified block diagram for the USP-1. I don't bother splitting out individual channels. Let me know if you think this needs tweaking to make it closer to reality.  Cheers. -- David |
|
|
|
Post by stuofsci02 on Apr 8, 2011 13:24:30 GMT -5
Dave,
Emo has already posted a block diagram for the USP-1 on the forum somewhere...
I will see if I can find it..
|
|
|
|
Post by hobbs on Apr 8, 2011 13:45:49 GMT -5
There is no need to throw the baby with the bath water! You can keep both USP-1 and UMC-1. Use an audio source selector: TCC TC-716 from www.phonopreamps.com/tc716pp.html. And it costs $27.50. Also available on Amazon, I believe. Hahaha. My purpose in adding the USP-1 to the mix was enhance enjoyment of two channel music playback by having a shorter and more pure signal path. Whatever I gained by routing music through USP-1 would surely be lost (and more) by inserting a second pair of interconnects and a $27 source selector between the UMC-1/USP-1 and my front power amp. Well, that and a second pair of LAT International IC-200 MkII's will set me back $325 in addition to the cost of the selector. LOL. Thanks for the suggestion though. Still deciding if I should send this thing back or if I might have some use for it in a second system once the XSP-1 is in the house. Cheers. -- David I humbly withdraw my suggestions  . Those cables cost more than my some components of my audio system!-What was I thinking!  Top Ten Signs an Audio Cable Vendor is Selling You Snake Oil:www.audioholics.com/education/cables/top-ten-signs-an-audio-cable-vendor-is-selling-you-snake-oilThe link is for others, such as myself, who need to be educated on cables. Peace! |
|
|
|
Post by dsnyder0cnn on Apr 8, 2011 15:21:37 GMT -5
Don't knock-em 'til you've tried 'em. My current digital source (ignoring the connected laptop) cost less than half as much as the USB and RCA interconnects attached to it. And don't get me started on the massive bundle of LAT cables coming out of the UMC-1. I've tried a bunch of different cables, but I just can't find anything else that gives me anything close to the sound that I'm getting with LAT without spending at least three times more. Like most folks here, I don't like spending money that I don't have to. This same sense of value is what brought me to Emotiva (and to Legacy Audio). Why pay two or three times more for the same performance...or why not get two or three times the performance as available alternatives for the same money? :-) There are many paths to audio joy as can be seen on this forum, but I have personally found that Emotiva electronics driving Legacy Audio loudspeakers through LAT International cables is a pretty sweet way to go. Cheers. -- David |
|
|
|
Post by roadrunner on Apr 8, 2011 19:40:15 GMT -5
Dave, Emo has already posted a block diagram for the USP-1 on the forum somewhere... I will see if I can find it.. You are absolutely correct on Lonnie providing a block diagram for the USP-1. Lonnie explained that the design of the USP-1 uses low noise relays to perform the HT ByPass which routes the signal directly from the HT INPUT block to output... essentially turning the USP-1 into a direct straight-wire connection from the HT processor. In a discussion I had with Lonnie when the USP-1 was first released, he said that this design was picked for several reasons. First, being an HT-ByPass enabled preamplifier it was assumed that owners would already own a sub-woofer for enhanced bass extention even if they owned Full Range speakers; second, if they were planning on using a separate room for music listening the provided Full Range would provide the option of using or not using sub woofers with your desired choice of speakers, especially since you would not be using the HT ByPass function; and, third, the USP-1's current design allowed maintaining an extremely low noise floor at minimal cost. During this conversation with Lonnie, he said to design the USP-1 to be used the way you wished would have added significant costs to the manufacturing cost of the USP-1 in order to provide the same low noise floor. Lonnie also pointed out that even using the High Pass Outputs with a 50Hz crossover (using Full Range speakers only) would still provide strong performance down into the 30s; and, very little music recordings contain content below that point. David, you are correct, the XSP-1 will have HT ByPass for any combination of speakers (2.0 or 2.1), with or without sub woofer support. As shown at Emofest, it will also have L, R and Summed subwoofer connections. The XSP-1 is also slated to have fully balanced signal paths for those who own XPA-1s or other fully balanced power amps. The XSP-1 looks like it will be a truly special audiophile grade stereo preamplifier. Hopefully, a full features list will be released in the short term. |
|
|
|
Post by dsnyder0cnn on Apr 9, 2011 9:37:44 GMT -5
During this conversation with Lonnie, he said to design the USP-1 to be used the way you wished would have added significant costs to the manufacturing cost of the USP-1 in order to provide the same low noise floor. Lonnie also pointed out that even using the High Pass Outputs with a 50Hz crossover (using Full Range speakers only) would still provide strong performance down into the 30s; and, very little music recordings contain content below that point. David, you are correct, the XSP-1 will have HT ByPass for any combination of speakers (2.0 or 2.1), with or without sub woofer support. As shown at Emofest, it will also have L, R and Summed subwoofer connections. The XSP-1 is also slated to have fully balanced signal paths for those who own XPA-1s or other fully balanced power amps. The XSP-1 looks like it will be a truly special audiophile grade stereo preamplifier. Hopefully, a full features list will be released in the short term. The design choices make a lot more sense to me now, and from what I've heard out of this thing, it's hard to argue with Lonnie's design priorities. I suppose it's not all bad that the marketing information on the USP-1 is vague about the full-range outputs being "bypassed" in "HT Bypass" mode; had this been more clear, I would have missed out on experiencing the USP-1 in my own playback system. Thanks! -- David |
|
flyhigh
Emo VIPs 
North Carolina
Posts: 524
|
Post by flyhigh on Apr 9, 2011 10:13:33 GMT -5
If I have kept my scorecard up to date, then the HT inputs are routed to the HP/LP outputs POST filter, thus effectively making the HP outputs "full range" in HT-Bypass mode. This is what I have gathered, and supports my original interpretation of the user manual.
It's of no consequence to me in my minimalist set up here, but I hope this is what you were looking for David. The USP-1 sure is a sweetheart.
Alas...I'm definitely putting the XSP-1 on my short list for future purchase. It really ought to be an amazing unit.
-Fly
|
|
" I agree, it makes no sense. Lonnie's explanation was that if people were using the pass through inputs then that must mean they were playing their home theaters, and HT always uses a subwoofer. 
. Those cables cost more than my some components of my audio system!-What was I thinking! 
