|
|
Post by foggy1956 on Aug 25, 2014 21:17:05 GMT -5
Power on, standby and lowest power options all available without having to go into the menu tree. It would be great if hitting the standby button twice would put it into the lowest power option. That way, during the day when I might turn it on and off a few times, I can hit it once and have it go to standby. When I'm heading to bed for the night, I can hit it a second time, and the thing shuts down completely. perfect |
|
|
|
Post by wizardofoz on Aug 25, 2014 21:41:23 GMT -5
+1 I'd also like to see the ability to turn on when an input button is pushed with a change to that input in the process (overriding the last used or default power on selection. clearly in warm standby it sees the commands as it changes inputs. Perhaps an option to just switch inputs or maybe if you hold the input button down longer or have a setting to do one or the other (change or change and power on) when an input is selected. Oh and while on the remote...how about some rubber buttons to protect your surfaces...like umc-1's had. these weapons grade remotes are not light nor soft. And maybe even an optional rubber bumper incase it falls on the floor like the iPhone number guards  . |
|
|
|
Post by bmwfreak on Aug 26, 2014 20:18:14 GMT -5
Is there a possibility of blu tooth without another external device? I know not the best audio but it sure would save additional wiring on front panel or rear
Handy for zone 2 music outdoors!
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Aug 26, 2014 20:19:57 GMT -5
+1 I'd also like to see the ability to turn on when an input button is pushed with a change to that input in the process (overriding the last used or default power on selection. clearly in warm standby it sees the commands as it changes inputs. Perhaps an option to just switch inputs or maybe if you hold the input button down longer or have a setting to do one or the other (change or change and power on) when an input is selected. |
|
|
|
Post by sme on Aug 27, 2014 0:48:20 GMT -5
Values of 10 and higher indicate you're overcorrecting issues that are only valid for a single point in space but not for a larger area. Unfortunately, the Q setting on the XMC-1 is limited to 10.0, and REW often has significantly larger Q values for the generic EQ. This is not necessarily true in my experience. Some of my subs currently have filters with Q as high as 24, and the filters were chosen for good performance across multiple seats. Regardless of Q, if you correct based on measurements at a single point, you will get a result that's only "valid" for that point. Even this doesn't really work because you have two ears with space between them and a tendency to move your head as you listen. Good EQ *requires* consideration of multiple measurement locations. |
|
|
|
Post by urwi on Aug 27, 2014 5:25:42 GMT -5
The context wasn't subwoofers only. Anyway, how would a filter with Q 24 help if you acknowledge that multiple points need to be considered? Care to share measurements that show the improvement? Maybe in another thread? Values of 10 and higher indicate you're overcorrecting issues that are only valid for a single point in space but not for a larger area. This is not necessarily true in my experience. Some of my subs currently have filters with Q as high as 24, and the filters were chosen for good performance across multiple seats. Regardless of Q, if you correct based on measurements at a single point, you will get a result that's only "valid" for that point. Even this doesn't really work because you have two ears with space between them and a tendency to move your head as you listen. Good EQ *requires* consideration of multiple measurement locations. |
|
|
|
Post by skymovessideways on Aug 27, 2014 16:23:17 GMT -5
I REALLY want back the UMC-1's flexibility to fully configure custom inputs. Specifically, with the XMC-1, when going to customize the setups for inputs, one cannot (on HDMI #1-8) change the video input from any of the setups - one can only change the audio source (i.e., to Coax, Toslink, or analog in). One could change either on the UMC-1, and this enabled huge and useful flexibility. For example, with the UMC-1 I can set "Aux 5" to use HDMI #1 for audio and video and choose specific other settings (like, EQ on or off, preferred mapping of input formats to desired output formats and the like) AND I could set "Aux 6" to ALSO use HDMI #1 for audio and video yet choose other specific settings like those mentioned. Why is this helpful? Simple - with 1 button push, I can have the UMC-1 playing exactly the way I want it without having to scroll through settings if I wanted to toggle between EQ on and EQ off, for example. With the XMC-1, one cannot duplicate a physical HDMI input selection on more than 1 customizable input - so this great functionality is lost from the UMC-1. What would I pay for this feature? Well, I had been told this was going to built into the XMC-1 by someone at Emotiva, so I really wouldn't expect to pay extra for it. lonnie - can this be modified with FW on the XMC-1 or are there hardware limitations? Thanks, Mark I totally agree. When a friend bought the UMC-200, we were very surprised this capability was missing as compared to my UMC-1. I am extremely disappointed this is not available in the XMC-1. Hopefully lonnie will respond and let us know if it can be added. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Aug 27, 2014 16:28:28 GMT -5
I REALLY want back the UMC-1's flexibility to fully configure custom inputs. Specifically, with the XMC-1, when going to customize the setups for inputs, one cannot (on HDMI #1-8) change the video input from any of the setups - one can only change the audio source (i.e., to Coax, Toslink, or analog in). One could change either on the UMC-1, and this enabled huge and useful flexibility. For example, with the UMC-1 I can set "Aux 5" to use HDMI #1 for audio and video and choose specific other settings (like, EQ on or off, preferred mapping of input formats to desired output formats and the like) AND I could set "Aux 6" to ALSO use HDMI #1 for audio and video yet choose other specific settings like those mentioned. Why is this helpful? Simple - with 1 button push, I can have the UMC-1 playing exactly the way I want it without having to scroll through settings if I wanted to toggle between EQ on and EQ off, for example. With the XMC-1, one cannot duplicate a physical HDMI input selection on more than 1 customizable input - so this great functionality is lost from the UMC-1. What would I pay for this feature? Well, I had been told this was going to built into the XMC-1 by someone at Emotiva, so I really wouldn't expect to pay extra for it. lonnie - can this be modified with FW on the XMC-1 or are there hardware limitations? Thanks, Mark I totally agree. When a friend bought the UMC-200, we were very surprised this capability was missing as compared to my UMC-1. I am extremely disappointed this is not available in the XMC-1. Hopefully lonnie will respond and let us know if it can be added. Some have speculated that this was a feature of the Cirrus chip set that the TI doesn't have, it would be nice to know that's the reason or if they just decided to do it differently. (I'll try to ask at EmoLA on Saturday) |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs 
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,090
|
Post by klinemj on Aug 27, 2014 17:10:08 GMT -5
Some have speculated that this was a feature of the Cirrus chip set that the TI doesn't have, it would be nice to know that's the reason or if they just decided to do it differently. (I'll try to ask at EmoLA on Saturday) PLEASE do!!! If it's not possible at all due to chipset, when my turn comes on the XMC or better yet RMC, I will find a way to live with it. But, if it is possible, I want it back bad! Note that the UMC-200 is also limited in its flexibility and it uses the Cirrus chipset. So, I am really hoping that this is something that the Emotiva gang could provide but didn't think was important to users. Bottom line...it IS!!! Those of us who used it in the UMC-1 found it to be a very loved and unique feature, and we want to keep it! Lonnie - got that?  Mark |
|
|
|
Post by sme on Aug 28, 2014 2:50:46 GMT -5
The context wasn't subwoofers only. Anyway, how would a filter with Q 24 help if you acknowledge that multiple points need to be considered? Care to share measurements that show the improvement? Maybe in another thread? Just because a frequency response aberration is narrow doesn't mean that it isn't relatively consistent at multiple measurement locations. Likewise, plenty of wider response aberrations *do* vary substantially between seats. The only way to know is to measure. It's not easy. Another thing about narrow aberrations (blips) is that they tend to contribute more phase distortion than wider blips having the same gain. This becomes more serious at higher bass frequencies as well. When integrating multiple subs, the phase distortions tend to cause more nulls to appear in the listening area in frequencies within the region of the blip. Often, the response is worse with both subs playing (even if time-aligned) than just one sub playing. As such, it is often help to add a narrow dip in the response of the sub whose response is least consistent across the listening area, as that minimizing the bad consequences of having the subs playing out of phase. If you start another thread and PM me about, I can maybe put up some pictures. |
|
|
|
Post by urwi on Aug 28, 2014 3:53:30 GMT -5
You're avoiding my question. Could you post measurements that show how a peak with a Q of 24 stays exactly the same at multiple locations? The context wasn't subwoofers only. Anyway, how would a filter with Q 24 help if you acknowledge that multiple points need to be considered? Care to share measurements that show the improvement? Maybe in another thread? Just because a frequency response aberration is narrow doesn't mean that it isn't relatively consistent at multiple measurement locations. Likewise, plenty of wider response aberrations *do* vary substantially between seats. The only way to know is to measure. It's not easy. Another thing about narrow aberrations (blips) is that they tend to contribute more phase distortion than wider blips having the same gain. This becomes more serious at higher bass frequencies as well. When integrating multiple subs, the phase distortions tend to cause more nulls to appear in the listening area in frequencies within the region of the blip. Often, the response is worse with both subs playing (even if time-aligned) than just one sub playing. As such, it is often help to add a narrow dip in the response of the sub whose response is least consistent across the listening area, as that minimizing the bad consequences of having the subs playing out of phase. If you start another thread and PM me about, I can maybe put up some pictures. |
|
|
|
Post by frenchyfranky on Aug 29, 2014 13:49:49 GMT -5
I didn't read all the 16 pages to see if someone before me asked.
My suggestion is very basic and simple but very useful, under the new XMC-1 remote there's no small rubber pads or feet or bumper, call it what you like, as the others Emotiva metal remotes are always have. It should be very much appropriate for avoid damaging the furniture surfaces because the metal remote is hard and heavy.
|
|
|
|
Post by wizardofoz on Aug 30, 2014 0:42:41 GMT -5
I mentioned this fact a few pages back I think...actually it was near the top of this page  |
|
|
|
Post by igorzep on Aug 30, 2014 10:15:52 GMT -5
You're avoiding my question. Could you post measurements that show how a peak with a Q of 24 stays exactly the same at multiple locations? You are asking wrong question based on wrong assumption. The problem (a high Q peak) doesn't need to be consistent at multiple locations, quite vice versa - it will be inconsistent by definition (as high Q peak source is a mode that is - inconsistency of sound wave pressure vs velocity across the room). But it still needs high Q filter to properly correct it. |
|
reaper60
Sensei
Music Makes Me Happy!
Posts: 505
|
Post by reaper60 on Aug 30, 2014 10:45:35 GMT -5
Please add the bi-amp feature where I can set my rear back or front height channels to output a duplicate front stereo signal so that I can use it to bi-amp my front stage. Even better if this channel has separate tone controls / EQ as I could then set the low pass separately for the high and low amp sections. This was a feature on the UMC-200 and I was not happy when I installed my new XMC to find it missing.
|
|
|
|
Post by ocezam on Aug 30, 2014 12:04:46 GMT -5
I agree. It never crossed my mind it was possible. I have heights and wides and wouldn't go back. In fact I really haven't been reading much about the XMC simply because 7.x doesn't interest me. I'd buy one in a heartbeat if this were available. It's either that, or rerouting both Zone1 and Zone2 RCAs to do this. I'd been using my Yamaha DSP-A1's height speakers for the last 15 years... Now that I've just replaced it for a UMC-1 I'm already missing that feature. I just think Emotiva is going to make a big mistake if they cannot find a way to implement this on the XMC-1 right now, Dolby Atmos or no Dolby Atmos... I agree. I used Yamaha equip before my current Onkyo, and yeah, I always used the Yamaha's presence speakers. Now with the heights/wides, I simply won'r go back to 7.x. |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Aug 30, 2014 22:35:01 GMT -5
Yep! Would love to keep my 11.4 set up and the Neo X abilities!
7.4 just won't cut it'.
|
|
riscy
Minor Hero
Posts: 28
|
Post by riscy on Aug 31, 2014 1:58:46 GMT -5
Been using my XMC-1 for a few days now, and here's what I've found... Bug fixes: - The DHCP setting is reversed. If I "disable" DHCP, I immediately get an IP address. Also, it doesn't seem to be getting any DNS server entries via DHCP. Feature requests: - I have the USB-B port connected to a Mac mini. If the XMC-1 could name itself through the USB as something more descriptive than "speaker" that would be helpful. Maybe at the same time as the 192kHz fix? - I would like to see programmable/selectable delay timers on the trigger outputs. 1,2,3,4,5 seconds, perhaps? Right now, my 3 XPRs all power on simultaneously, and I'm concerned about inrush. If I daisy-chain them, I get a slight delay effect, but it's much cleaner to plug them each directly into the XMC-1, IMO. - I "get" the menuing system controls (and yes, they are rather intuitive), but could you please add the ability to select a menu/item via the button in the center of the arrow keys in addition to the right arrow? Using the center button is way more intuitive to me, and consistent with many other UIs out there. - Please, please, PLEASE release the network control API. I've enjoyed network/app-based automation for years and my Roomie Remote is aching to be functional again!!  So far, I am really happy with the unit. I'm replacing a Denon 4311ci, and I am simply blown away by the improvement in dynamic contrasts. Once Dirac is inline, I'm anticipating pure bliss! |
|
|
|
Post by urwi on Aug 31, 2014 2:34:15 GMT -5
A peak of any Q needs to exist at any point within the listening area to be correctable with PEQ. I doubt a peak of Q 24 will exist in multiple seats. I've never seen that happening that's why I've asked for data. You're avoiding my question. Could you post measurements that show how a peak with a Q of 24 stays exactly the same at multiple locations? You are asking wrong question based on wrong assumption. The problem (a high Q peak) doesn't need to be consistent at multiple locations, quite vice versa - it will be inconsistent by definition (as high Q peak source is a mode that is - inconsistency of sound wave pressure vs velocity across the room). But it still needs high Q filter to properly correct it. |
|
|
|
Post by igorzep on Aug 31, 2014 3:19:42 GMT -5
A peak of any Q needs to exist at any point within the listening area to be correctable with PEQ. I doubt a peak of Q 24 will exist in multiple seats. I've never seen that happening that's why I've asked for data. By your definition any room mode peak of any Q is not correctable... It is not working like that. A modal peak (a room issue) of any Q won't be a peak at all locations. Whenever there is a modal peak then there is a corresponding modal null somewhere. Null is uncorrectable (boost is harmful, but there is no harm attenuating it as it is a null anyway), but peak must be corrected still. We correct by peaks if there is a variation across the listening area (and there is always variation)! Moreover, even not at peak position there is a time-domain smearing (ringing) at the mode frequency (mode is not a local problem, it exists across the room at the same time at all points - peaks, nulls, and in between). By reducing peak we are also reduce this ringing even at positions where there is no peak. So again - if any point in the listening area have a peak - it needs to be corrected. But it is not true that all points should have the peak to be correctable. |
|
. 
