What is the XDA used for?

[jamrock]

Oct 14, 2010 17:59:27 GMT -5 blessingx said:

If that's the difference between old and modern thinking, I guess I'm old-school. Limited range better? And yes, I have an Ultra 10 coming tomorrow.

This is a DAC with digital variable output (in that sense exactly as a Lavry DA10/11 for instance). While there are sound shaping adjustments in some DACs (including the DA11) tossing in bass management and outputs to make it more pre-amp/amp/receiver-like would be a whole other product (with added costs, dependent functionality, by-passes, etc.), no?

I guess I'm much more concerned with all the normal DAC questions like bitrate support (88.2/176.4 locks?), input conversions, USB possible restrictions (conflicting info on the forums) and that big one - SQ. I hope they get most of those right for $299.

That is not the complete difference between antiquated and modern audio thinking. But that's another thread.

You could have everything you have mentioned above and still left something for me in the XDA-1.

If you're genuinely committed to have high end audio as it seems obvious from your comments, paying another $100.00 for the XDA-1 would not deter you. Can you find another high end DAC that interests you, that is within $100.00 of the XDA-1?

High end audio is not the exclusive domain of old school listeners. Give all audio enthusiasts the opportunity to enjoy the best sound reproduction.

Better yet, expand your market and increase your sales. ;D

jamrock

[mrla]

i rarely come to read leave alone post here. but i'd got email the other day about xda-1. i put a pre-order right away. it will replace my venerable Lavry DA-10. I see XDA-1 cosmetically better match with my NHT XDA amp and I assume can take RAW signal. DA10 can't. For what it is the XDA-1 will be almost like my DA-10 function wise, minus the Headphone output. wish it is on XDA-1 also.

[blessingx]

What do you mean by 'RAW' signal?

[mrla]

hmm, my OPPO DVD player puts out either RAW(pure? unadulterated?) or PCM. DA10 can't decode RAW.

[Erwin.BE]

To all those folks who want to use a SW: just get a REL. These can be connected at the speaker bindings using their "Speakon" inputs. I have two REL's:

1/ the T5 (used to be called R505) with my Surround setup. This one is both connected via the normal LFE output of the AVR and the Speakon. This is the best of 2 worlds, because even when I use the straight 2-channel playback, without any LFE content, it still extends into the low frequencies via this speaker level connections.
www.rel.net/index2.htm

2/ the little T3 in my office to extend the in-walls. This is only connected with the Speakon.

But beware: inserting a SW has downsides as opposed to just getting huge full range speakers. While it is commonly known that anything below 80 Hz is directionally undetectable, it is often forgotten that the distance between the listener and the respective transducers is very critical. This means that if your speakers are @ 10' and your single SW @ 15', you will end up with muddy bass. Even with a pre-pro or AVR that has time delay functions, this only works for one spot. Ideally, one should put a SW with each speaker and as close to it as possible.

But I prefer to get huge speakers for 2ch. Enter the Jamo R909.

[Topend]

Oct 15, 2010 3:42:14 GMT -5 Erwin.BE said:

But I prefer to get huge speakers for 2ch. Enter the Jamo R909.

Or a pair of VAF I-93 speakers.

"VAF Research specifies the frequency response of these speakers at an extraordinary 20 to 25,000 hertz ±2dB! It says that they have a sensitivity of 89dB for 2.83 volts input, a nominal impedance of 5 ohms, and are suitable for use with amplifiers rated from 10 to 500 watts output."

Dave.

[Nemesis.ie]

It's not the limited range that is better, it's using the sub for the lower end - so if you don't need the extra range as your sub takes over and limited range speakers cost less, you can save money or move up to better quality ones for the same money and be overall better off - as you need at least one sub for HT use anyway, you are not out of pocket by having the sub IYSWIM.

That was my rationale on my 6.3s and I am very happy with the sound they produce coupled with my 2 x F15s.

[vincedog3]

Now that is new to me. The Term RAW in digital photography for instance means pretty much what the imager captured in the camera and the data is stored uncompressed...usually, and unaltered by the camera's processing. I am not to sure about RAW audio however. Our XDA-1 is designed to play and run with PCM signals only. By the way, a prototype of the XDA-1 will be at the show. Real close to what the up and coming production units will be. That is the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest. This weekend.
audiofest.net/2010/index.php for more information.

[Nemesis.ie]

Oct 15, 2010 3:42:14 GMT -5 Erwin.BE said:

To all those folks who want to use a SW: just get a REL. These can be connected at the speaker bindings using their "Speakon" inputs. I have two REL's:

1/ the T5 (used to be called R505) with my Surround setup. This one is both connected via the normal LFE output of the AVR and the Speakon. This is the best of 2 worlds, because even when I use the straight 2-channel playback, without any LFE content, it still extends into the low frequencies via this speaker level connections.
www.rel.net/index2.htm

2/ the little T3 in my office to extend the in-walls. This is only connected with the Speakon.

But beware: inserting a SW has downsides as opposed to just getting huge full range speakers. While it is commonly known that anything below 80 Hz is directionally undetectable, it is often forgotten that the distance between the listener and the respective transducers is very critical. This means that if your speakers are @ 10' and your single SW @ 15', you will end up with muddy bass. Even with a pre-pro or AVR that has time delay functions, this only works for one spot. Ideally, one should put a SW with each speaker and as close to it as possible.

But I prefer to get huge speakers for 2ch. Enter the Jamo R909.

I think any sub with high-level input will do what you describe - I'm tempted to hook up my two F15s like that to see what if anything it does to the sound. It only takes an extra metre of cable for the connection, however, one will also have to then fiddle with the sub's crossover control to get the speakers matching up nicely, a weekend project with REW to hand methinks (and when herself is not around!).

[jamrock]

I'm using 2 Ultra 12 SWs. They only have line level, bal & unbal inputs. I could use the lone Velodyne SPL 12 which I replaced with the 2 Ultra 12s. However, that would only give me a temporary fix as the SPL 12 is destined for the bedroom theater. Bummer!

jamrock

[gman1234]

I'm going to place my XDA between my squeezebox and the USP-1. I'm not going to miss my PS Audio DIGITAL link III. The PS Audio IMO sounds no better than the built in DAC in my UMC-1.
The Emo XDA will obviously look cool stacked with it's siblings, but I just trust Emo to deliver on sound so I reserved one. What's it used for? It's a DAC. The fact that it has digital volume control will suit those looking to use it as a 2 channel digital pre-amp. I think 2.1 channel fans would be well served with the XDA/USP combo at a very attractive price point. I think Emo's "building block" approach is the way to go, otherwise you start offering products that overlap too much. The XDA and USP and UMC will work well together for me.
I've got 2 questions regarding Emo and my second wife of 5 yrs now... Where have you been all my life?

[jamrock]

Let me be clear! I'm not questioning the performance of the XDA-1. From the specs sheet, it should perform admirably. My beef is that 2 channel enthusiasts seem to be getting preferential treatment. The XDA-1 was made for them only. If a multi-channel enthusiast wishes to use the XDA-1, all sorts of work arounds must be considered, with added costs.

This should not be. There is high resolution, multi-channel audio which is also a part of today's audio experience. The technology is there, and to accommodate this feature on the XDA-1 should not be cost prohibitive.

There is a thinking in audio which militates that adding anything in the audio path pollutes it, and you don't get the full impact of the original presentation. So, the best reproduction is a straight path from source to power amp to speaker.

However, good engineering with high quality parts, crossovers and volume controls have been shown to have no audible effect on the audio signal. And, whatever minimal effect there might be, if you can measure it but can't hear it, what does it matter? This thinking is based on perception rather than reality!

All I'm trying to say is this: If I already have a music theater and want to take advantage of the excellency of the XDA-1, I should not have to buy a pre/amp or other add-ons to do so. And, if I want to use bass management and "miss the true sound" that's my business.

jamrock

[jamrock]

I did not see the need to create a new thread for this. But, I need sound advice on this issue. If I want to take advantage of the superior DAC in my AVR orpre/pro, should I use the coaxial digital or the optical output of the CD player? Please explain if there is an advantage for one over the other. Thanx

jamrock

[sharkman]

"My beef is that 2 channel enthusiasts seem to be getting preferential treatment. The XDA-1 was made for them only."

In the past year or so, the UPA-5, UPA-7 have been released. As well the UMC-1 has been monopolizing Emotiva's resources for a great deal of that time. Now we hear that a new line with multi channel amps and a processor is coming down the pike. It is indeed a great time to be an Emotiva enthusiast!

For those of us 2 channel purists, the pickings have been slim, however. And I suppose that is as it should be since in the audio marketplace the vast majority of consumers want home theater set ups. And the 2 channel gear that has been in development has been delayed for many months, I'm thinking of the XSP-1 and the XDA-1.

So it seems to me that the 2 channel segment of the market is not getting preferential treatment at all. No matter what product Emotiva releases, there will be some people who are not happy about it. You simply can not please everyone. The XDA-1 is for music, 97% of which is recorded in 2 channel. It's everything I could need for my 2 channel system and they threw in a volume control and a remote! But to expect that every single product that Emotiva releases be for home theater systems is unrealistic.

Personally I had been waiting a couple of years for Outlaw to release a 2 channel amp. They still haven't, and their product line has been mostly static for a few years. I turned to Emotiva when I learned about them and have found them to be far more innovative and willing to take chances for the customer.

[jamrock]

Oct 16, 2010 11:53:02 GMT -5 sharkman said:

"My beef is that 2 channel enthusiasts seem to be getting preferential treatment. The XDA-1 was made for them only."

In the past year or so, the UPA-5, UPA-7 have been released. As well the UMC-1 has been monopolizing Emotiva's resources for a great deal of that time. Now we hear that a new line with multi channel amps and a processor is coming down the pike. It is indeed a great time to be an Emotiva enthusiast!

For those of us 2 channel purists, the pickings have been slim, however. And I suppose that is as it should be since in the audio marketplace the vast majority of consumers want home theater set ups. And the 2 channel gear that has been in development has been delayed for many months, I'm thinking of the XSP-1 and the XDA-1.

So it seems to me that the 2 channel segment of the market is not getting preferential treatment at all. No matter what product Emotiva releases, there will be some people who are not happy about it. You simply can not please everyone. The XDA-1 is for music, 97% of which is recorded in 2 channel. It's everything I could need for my 2 channel system and they threw in a volume control and a remote! But to expect that every single product that Emotiva releases be for home theater systems is unrealistic.

Personally I had been waiting a couple of years for Outlaw to release a 2 channel amp. They still haven't, and their product line has been mostly static for a few years. I turned to Emotiva when I learned about them and have found them to be far more innovative and willing to take chances for the customer.

All the multi-channel components you have mentioned (UPA-5, UPA-&, UMC-1, etc.) can be used by the 2-channel purist with excellent result.

The XDA-1 enhances the musical experience. Why not design it so that all enthusiasts can enjoy this offer, especially when we are the bigger share of the market?

The vast majority of home theaters use small speakers with a sub woofer. (Small means +/- 80Hz - 20Khz) not a sub/sat combo. And, this segment is growing while the 2-channel group is possibly, not growing or is getting lesser.

I say bad marketing & shortsightedness. Hopefully, in the not too distant future, Emo will produce a true, high quality DAC designed especially for the multi-channel purists. Now, that would be excellently sweet! ;D

jamrock

[sharkman]

But why should a 2 channel enthusiast have to buy a 5 channel amp when they only need 2 channels? Also it's not recommended to run the Emotiva 5 channel amps that way only, it stresses the components is what a Emo rep has said. And why should a stereo purist have to buy all of the extra features of a UMC when they only need a 2 channel pre amp? You are suggesting we spend 699 instead of 399 for the USP? Sorry, I don't follow. Those products are designed for the home theater and that's fine. I don't feel hard done by. Emotiva is releasing mostly multi channel products for the home theater market already, this will be the first dedicated 2 channel product since what, the USP? It's unrealistic to expect them to release nothing but home theater products since the vast majority of music being recorded is 2 channel.

Also, why should Emotiva design a DAC for multi-channel when so little music is recorded in multi-channel? It doesn't make economic sense is probably the reason they went with the design they chose. Is there any DAC's out there that even have bass management? Like I mentioned earlier no product release will make everyone happy, that's just the way it is, I think Emo is more market savvy and their record thus far proves it. They have easily eclipsed Outlaw in a few short years and may in time put them out of business. You don't achieve that kind of success by bad marketing & shortsightedness.

Others have made excellent suggestions on how to integrate the XDA into a home theater system and I may try it out in mine when I get it.

[jamrock]

Oct 16, 2010 12:58:18 GMT -5 sharkman said:

But why should a 2 channel enthusiast have to buy a 5 channel amp when they only need 2 channels? Also it's not recommended to run the Emotiva 5 channel amps that way only, it stresses the components is what a Emo rep has said. And why should a stereo purist have to buy all of the extra features of a UMC when they only need a 2 channel pre amp? You are suggesting we spend 699 instead of 399 for the USP? Sorry, I don't follow. Those products are designed for the home theater and that's fine. I don't feel hard done by. Emotiva is releasing mostly multi channel products for the home theater market already, this will be the first dedicated 2 channel product since what, the USP? It's unrealistic to expect them to release nothing but home theater products since the vast majority of music being recorded is 2 channel.

Also, why should Emotiva design a DAC for multi-channel when so little music is recorded in multi-channel? It doesn't make economic sense is probably the reason they went with the design they chose. Is there any DAC's out there that even have bass management? Like I mentioned earlier no product release will make everyone happy, that's just the way it is.

Others have made excellent suggestions on how to integrate the XDA into a home theater system and I may try it out in mine when I get it.

Because the A/V world have changed and some folks seems unable or unwilling to let go of the past. However, fortunately for 2-channel purists, the change has been modular - from 2.0 - 2.1 - 5.1 - 7.1 - 9.2 - 11.2 and on, and on, and on! Therefore, regardless of the change, they are always accommodated.

As to what the Emo rep told you about using a multi-channel amp for stereo, this is new to my understanding, but I'm skeptical.

I want integration without the need for add-ons and additional cost, or potential sound degredation just like you. ;D

jamrock

[sharkman]

What Emotiva has said about prolonged use of multi channel amps has been discussed on this forum at length. I have no idea whether the 2 channel market is increasing or decreasing, but the interest in old fashioned records has been growing. At any rate, that Emotiva is catering to this market says something. FYI, I also have a home theater system worth over $7000, so I'm a theater fan as well!

I guess we will have to disagree on this, but personally I'm glad Emotiva is catering to the 2 channel market occasionally. I guess there aren't any DAC's out there that do what you want? This suggests that all of the other standalone DAC manufacturers also decided a design that you are suggesting would be a bad idea. But what do I know, I own some bose gear!(headphones with noise canceling feature)

[jamrock]

Oct 16, 2010 13:40:01 GMT -5 sharkman said:

What Emotiva has said about prolonged use of multi channel amps has been discussed on this forum at length. I have no idea whether the 2 channel market is increasing or decreasing, but the interest in old fashioned records has been growing. At any rate, that Emotiva is catering to this market says something. FYI, I also have a home theater system worth over $7000, so I'm a theater fan as well!

I guess we will have to disagree on this, but personally I'm glad Emotiva is catering to the 2 channel market occasionally. I guess there aren't any DAC's out there that do what you want? This suggests that all of the other standalone DAC manufacturers also decided a design that you are suggesting would be a bad idea. But what do I know, I own some bose gear!(headphones with noise canceling feature)

This was a nice & respectable discussion. I'm sure that there are many out there who will support your stance. And many more who would support mine. ;D

I am not de-legitimizing 2 channel audio. I do more stereo listening than multi-channel, but not by design. I also do own a large cache of vinyls and a Technics SL-QD33 turntable. I am waiting on the release of the XMC-1 with its high level phono stage to wax nostalgic.

But, I stand by my premise that since more consumers listen to music via their home theater rig, why leave them out of the mix.

I would like to experience a SACD recording output via the XDA-1 overlaid with DPL IIx. Or a DVD-A 5.1 recording, DTS-HD/MA and Dolby Tru HD multi-channel mix when output via DACs of the quality of the XDA-1. Heavenly. Orgasmic, I believe! ;D

All I can do is dream. I wish that the XDA-1 delivers for you the experience you desire, and for as long as you want.

Enjoy the music.

jamrock

[sharkman]

Well spoken, I have to say this is one of the most courteous sites I have visited and though audio is a very passionate topic for most of us, there is respect among us enthusiasts. And as far as Emotiva goes, I think the next 12 months will prove very interesting indeed.