|
|
Post by Absolute on Jun 12, 2013 0:47:36 GMT -5
Thank you.
Regarding the headphone output: I saw a graph from srrndhound, a member here, and it showed an 'equalized' (badly) headphone output.
Care to comment? And you just said above that the headphones are fed a "mixed down" signal. ...No straight stereo audio with a flat line across the entire audio spectrum?
Also, srrndhound mentioned that the 'curve'of the headphones is influenced by the chosen surround audio mode?
...Seems "equalized" to me, if I may say. And I bet that the manual doesn't have any mention of this either?
Last, the things we need to know; only by experimenting and discovering ourselves that we can ask and get an answer for confirmation?
|
|
|
|
Post by saarg on Jun 12, 2013 4:02:24 GMT -5
This is a policy I think is poor customer treatment. Would it cost you a lot to just simply put the specifications correct on the product page and in the manual? It's a matter of 15 minutes to correct it... Answers inline...... 5. The UMC-200 instruction manual, it doesn't indicate that you cannot equalize the back surround channels? Again, we didn't consider it important.... (we will - and do - cheerfully tell anybody who asks  ) |
|
|
|
Post by Absolute on Jun 12, 2013 15:47:39 GMT -5
...And I believe that I got my answer regarding the headphones audio output.
- From my perspective here; it was simply poorly implemented, and now this headphone jack on the SSP UMC-200 is not working properly, read obsolete.
And thanks to srrndhound for pointing that quite important aspect (for people who like to use headphones now and then).
My personal opinion: For me the Back Surround channels are important. They are part of the "mains" in a 7.1-channel system setup from Blu-rays with encoded discrete hi-res 7.1-channel audio soundtracks.
Even an 11.3-channel system setup (Audyssey DSX or/and DTS NeoX) should have all its channel speakers equalized in a properly home theater setup.
But I do understand the cost of the UMC-200 and I guess that most people can live without the back surround channels being equalized.
And that headphones output is not something that most people can live with, in my opinion.
It is a little sad that audio/video pro reviewers cannot find those important aspects of the products they review.
In my book, these pro reviewers are no pros at all.
Mention all the good; good. ...And don't forget the bad though; after all, we, the customers we read those reviews to be fully informed for wise purchase decisions. We are contributing to the good of them reviewers by purchasing them audio/video mags. We, the readers, are the main reason why they write reviews in the first place. ...Or are we now?
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs 
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Jun 17, 2013 12:40:53 GMT -5
Can someone with a UMC-200 list the default freq settings for each of the 11 bands?
Also list the available ranges for each.
...and can we get this info added to a future version of the manual?
|
|
|
|
Post by bolle on Jun 19, 2013 6:04:54 GMT -5
Can someone with a UMC-200 list the default freq settings for each of the 11 bands? This is absolutely NOT important because you will change it according to need? Btw. every band is the same regarding its possibilites - see also the thread in the processor section. This is different (and better) than e.g. a Rotel RSP-1572. No artificial limitation of the bands you are given. |
|
bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Jun 19, 2013 9:46:30 GMT -5
Can someone with a UMC-200 list the default freq settings for each of the 11 bands? This is absolutely NOT important because you will change it according to need? Btw. every band is the same regarding its possibilites - see also the thread in the processor section. This is different (and better) than e.g. a Rotel RSP-1572. No artificial limitation of the bands you are given. So it is different even though they use the same DSP? Just trying to flush out if the PEQ is purely software based or somehow hard coded in the DSP. Your statement would suggest that in 2.0 one could use all 11 bands below 200Hz if they wished. Is that indeed the case? (I don't own one so I can't verify and the manual doesn't state either way. |
|
|
|
Post by bolle on Jun 20, 2013 1:30:52 GMT -5
Yes it is different, same chip but different FW / coding. Emotiva gives the user much more freedom.
You can select below 200Hz on every band - they are exactly the same! I didn´t test for negative side effects / distortion etc. with more than 3 bands on the same frequency. But in my case I have 5 or 6 bands per speaker configured below 300Hz, even if I am only using 3 of them in my current calibration.
|
|
|
|
Post by Absolute on Jun 20, 2013 2:12:09 GMT -5
That sounds cool!
|
|
igor
Minor Hero
Posts: 95
|
Post by igor on Sept 10, 2013 7:08:04 GMT -5
The UMC-200 has 11 bands of PEQ on each of the main channels (front left and right, front center, left and right surround). There are three bands on the sub channel, but no EQ on the rear surrounds (where it is less critical). The PT-7030 has ten bands on each main channel and, I believe, 4 bands on the sub. Keith, is the 11-band PEQ available in all 7 channels in Emotiva AVPs using this DSP? (I listed the two Cirrus DSP that have PEQ not quite sure which one Emotiva uses in their products.) I recently got the PT-7030 and started to let REW loose on my system yesterday and started off with the sub, and as Keith said, while there is a 10 filter PEQ for the sub, the bands are divided so that only 4 of them are relevant for sub frequencies, and only 2 below 80hz. This led me to a question... 1. Is there any way to override this behaviour of the PT-7030, to relocate more PEQs to the lower frequencies or to widen the "bands"? =) (I can use the build-in PEQ of the XREF 12 for another 2 bands, but it seems a lot to fiddle both with the sub PEQ and the processor PEQ) 2. A somewhat non-related question but that is also about the PT-7030, since the platform is supposed to be the same as a certain rotel processor, that I have seen has some learning IR capabilities...is this somehow accessible on the PT-7030 as well? It would make wonders for my setup (and number of remotes =) ). I have seen that it can forward IR signals using the IR connectors on the back, but if it could learn as well that'd be great (especially since my XDA-2 remote is so much nicer than the plastic one of the 7030). Thankful for any tips! =) |
|
)
