|
|
Post by ansat on Sept 28, 2014 11:45:12 GMT -5
One slight correction... Dirac will "instruct" your XMC-1 to play the test tones via the network connection. You don't need a separate analog audio output on your computer. Yes it does, headphone jack will work, so will all the others. Just need the right cable. Keith, I think that the portion that you are responding to was about using the Dirac Trial. You WILL need an audio output to use the dirac trial. You will NOT need one for the XMC-1 calibration when released. Tony |
|
|
|
Post by sct on Sept 28, 2014 12:19:13 GMT -5
Laserman wrote: "I'm the type of guy that likes his desktop to be cluttered with Icons." You should give a look at Fences by Stardock. It allows one to easily and cleanly organize their desktop icons.... www.stardock.com/products/fences/SCT |
|
|
|
Post by MaisterK on Sept 28, 2014 17:56:57 GMT -5
Does it work for McIntosh too?
|
|
|
|
Post by laserman35 on Sept 28, 2014 19:14:26 GMT -5
Laserman wrote: "I'm the type of guy that likes his desktop to be cluttered with Icons." You should give a look at Fences by Stardock. It allows one to easily and cleanly organize their desktop icons.... www.stardock.com/products/fences/SCT I just hate how so many things are hidden on today's Windows vs Windows 95. Windows does keep improving and they keep hiding everything. I do have my Windows 8 looking like windows 7 now, I still prefer windows 95/98 layout. I see no benefit in changing the roads every time I drive. I do like the the same two turns to get to the store. Why change things that just work or give me the option for classic view that's actually classic. Back to Xmc-1 menu, I want a bigger OSD menu with lots of things to click on the same screen. If just feels better, I think that why most of the competition does this. This should not be a that costly of an investment for the programming "I mean real cheap". |
|
|
|
Post by sct on Sept 28, 2014 19:37:11 GMT -5
MaisterK, asking about Fences wondered: "Does it work for McIntosh too?"
Nope, as with sooooo many software products, Windoze only.
SCT
|
|
|
|
Post by autocrat on Sept 28, 2014 20:43:45 GMT -5
Back in the day* I created a picture that divided the screen into four quadrants, and set this as the desktop background. Then turned autoarrange off and moved the icons into the (arbitrarily defined) designated area. Not sure of this approach would work with new windows versions, but sometimes simpler is better.
*1997 or thereabouts
|
|
|
|
Post by ansat on Sept 29, 2014 19:35:34 GMT -5
Back in the day* I created a picture that divided the screen into four quadrants, and set this as the desktop background. Then turned autoarrange off and moved the icons into the (arbitrarily defined) designated area. Not sure of this approach would work with new windows versions, but sometimes simpler is better. *1997 or thereabouts Hmmm. This gets me thinking.. a favorite or shortcut menu might be neat. But what to populate it with? Thoughts? |
|
|
|
Post by ansat on Sept 30, 2014 10:18:33 GMT -5
Tony, I know you no longer have the Denon receiver and music is not your primary focus, but could you speak to the differences in the quality of music playback of your Denon, with and without Audyssey, compared to the UMC-200 and the XMC-1? Many say the difference in the sound quality between processors with movies is marginal while music can be significant. Also have you every compared your equipment to an Anthem MRX 510 or 710 receiver with ARC? Well it has been many moons since the 3808ci was in my system and I have slept a few times since then. The differences I remember mostly dealt with Audyssey multieq XT vs. manual eq. I personally liked the manual eq over Audyssey's custom and flat curve. I found that Audyssey always either tried to flatten the response over too great of an area or dropped the highs so much that the speakers lost all presence. This was the point where I started doing real research in room acoustics. The other major issue that I noticed was that dynamics improved with the UMC over the Denon at reference volumes. I felt like the Denon was being driven into clipping at or near reference and I had zero headroom. The differences in the UMC1 vs the 200 was control. The addition of parametric EQ allowed me to put the focus where I wanted. The other major difference was the next generation emoQ. While I never used it for the filters, I did use it for setting the distances. I firmly believe that linear distance is not always the same as the distance sound traveled to reach the listening position. (especially when it comes to phase alignment) and the UMC 200 did a better job then the original emoQ. Music. I have never been a fan of just music, although I will watch a concert every once in a while. The only concert I put through the paces on both the UMC-200 and the XMC was red rocks - Mumford and Sons. With the additional filter control I was able to restore some of the highs that were lost previously due to the amount of room treatments needed to control the bottom end of my room . As for the statement quality between processors with movies is marginal. I will agree to an extent for most content out there. However, there are a few out there that work wonderfully for testing new gear. My 3 go to movies to achieve different tests are : 1. Terminator Salvation - Scene where that big bot attacks the gas station. There is a lot that is going on in the scene and the vocals are easy to lose (especially if you are sitting off center) (This is really a test of eq skills and levels) 2. Dredd opening scene- This is a test of the low end - Check to see if the subs are still under control. 3. Master & commander - (the whole movie) This is the demo. There are lots of subtle creeks, rain, wind, waves etc. This has passages while at reference volume will swing from 40db to 110. This is my movie to see if the equipment is running out of steam. Other processors I have never had the chance to listen to Anthem. I have played with the Integra's and lots of receivers. But I always kept going back to the UMC previously (This was mainly due to the room treatments - I do not have to tweak the speakers much any more since I fixed most of everything in the room and did not get much advantage from MCACC and Audyssey). NOTE: I know that this post looks like I am hating on Audyssey. In reality, I recommend processors that have Audyssey 5 to 1 over the UMC-1 and 200. For anyone who is not willing to take the time to at least get a basic level of understanding of room correction, there is nothing that can compare to what Audyssey has been able to do with room correction and the amount of crappy situations it can fix. I am hoping that Dirac changes this. If Dirac can do what it did on the demo, and emotiva makes the XMC a little more user friendly for those who just want to hook it up and go. It will be hard not to recommend over other options. Tony Correction to above. Godzilla is the new low end test disc. Dredd is off the table. Watched it last night and I drove the lfe into clipping numerous times... going to have redo the eq and levels till that sounds good. The lfe was insane. Out of the 1000 movies I own, it was the first where I felt my subs didn't have enough juice and that the 12's wern't sufficient. I am wondering if a subsonic filter option in the xmc would be benifitial to anyone else? Tony |
|
|
|
Post by ansat on Sept 30, 2014 10:53:27 GMT -5
Having asked so many questions of Dan & Lonnie in Los Angeles, I want to say the microphones are being built in-house, and are similar in appearance to the MiniDSP UMIK-1 and such. Maybe Dan/Lonnie/Keith will clarify this for us. It would be really cool if they did. My money is on rebadged Dayton Audio UMM-6 microphones though. Tony I am changing my bet on the microphone. I now believe that the Mic will be built in house and standing behind lcseminole's comment. Tony |
|
|
|
Post by bluescale on Sept 30, 2014 13:20:00 GMT -5
Correction to above. Godzilla is the new low end test disc. Dredd is off the table. Watched it last night and I drove the lfe into clipping numerous times... going to have redo the eq and levels till that sounds good. The lfe was insane. Out of the 1000 movies I own, it was the first where I felt my subs didn't have enough juice and that the 12's wern't sufficient. I am wondering if a subsonic filter option in the xmc would be benifitial to anyone else? Godzilla is actually filtered pretty heavily starting at 30Hz. It doesn't have the steep cliff drop-off that Pacific Rim has, but it's not subsonic bass that is causing problems. It's overall SPL levels in the 30Hz-50Hz range. If you want to give your subs a real workout, with LFE dropping into the single digit range, check out War of the Worlds. This post has a .gif that compares Godzilla's bass to several other movies that are considered to have great bass: data-bass.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/291-godzilla-2014-discussion-poll/Keep in mind, these guys are extreme bass heads, but the point is still pretty good. You've got several movies in your collection that are in the cream of the crop: 9 Star Trek Hellboy 2 How to Train Your Dragon Check out this thread: data-bass.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/12-the-low-frequency-content-thread-films-games-music-etc/I was surprised when I saw how many movies filter at 30Hz. I don't have crazy subsonic capabilities in my room, but I'm flat to ~17Hz. I hate how many movies to make use of all that power I have available and just waiting to be used. |
|
|
|
Post by ansat on Sept 30, 2014 13:39:56 GMT -5
Correction to above. Godzilla is the new low end test disc. Dredd is off the table. Watched it last night and I drove the lfe into clipping numerous times... going to have redo the eq and levels till that sounds good. The lfe was insane. Out of the 1000 movies I own, it was the first where I felt my subs didn't have enough juice and that the 12's wern't sufficient. I am wondering if a subsonic filter option in the xmc would be benifitial to anyone else? Godzilla is actually filtered pretty heavily starting at 30Hz. It doesn't have the steep cliff drop-off that Pacific Rim has, but it's not subsonic bass that is causing problems. It's overall SPL levels in the 30Hz-50Hz range. If you want to give your subs a real workout, with LFE dropping into the single digit range, check out War of the Worlds. This post has a .gif that compares Godzilla's bass to several other movies that are considered to have great bass: data-bass.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/291-godzilla-2014-discussion-poll/Keep in mind, these guys are extreme bass heads, but the point is still pretty good. You've got several movies in your collection that are in the cream of the crop: 9 Star Trek Hellboy 2 How to Train Your Dragon Check out this thread: data-bass.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/12-the-low-frequency-content-thread-films-games-music-etc/I was surprised when I saw how many movies filter at 30Hz. I don't have crazy subsonic capabilities in my room, but I'm flat to ~17Hz. I hate how many movies to make use of all that power I have available and just waiting to be used. Interesting. I don't have troubles with war of the worlds, or any other movie listed. But all other movies were done without the xmc and without the mythos st-l in the system. I guess it's time to grab the mic and start running a few more sweeps. With the xmc I decided to try a new room curve that gave more gain then my prev below 200hz. I might go back to my previous and try that. Tony |
|
|
|
Post by ansat on Sept 30, 2014 16:56:34 GMT -5
It would be really cool if they did. My money is on rebadged Dayton Audio UMM-6 microphones though. Tony I am changing my bet on the microphone. I now believe that the Mic will be built in house and standing behind lcseminole's comment. Tony Dan has confirmed that the microphones will be in house. (and laser engraved)... He even called me out in the podcast...  LOL |
|
|
|
Post by ansat on Oct 2, 2014 12:10:08 GMT -5
Another correction. Godzilla makes a horrible test disc. Dredd is back on the table.
Sent from my SM-G900P
|
|
|
|
Post by ansat on Oct 21, 2014 18:12:20 GMT -5
ADDED to my review. Edit 2 10/21 - re-evaluation of the PEQ implementation. Over the last month, I have seen more and more users of the XMC claim to be getting better results with the XMC then what they were able to achieve over the UMC-200. This has caused me to question just how user friendly the PEQ is. Since I was unable to obtain any SQ enhancements that others are obtaining, this is cause for me to believe that that the tools in the XMC are presented in a way that more users are able to understand over the UMC-200. One of the major things that stick out is determining the size of the filter. Since this is not something that I use all the time, I usually have to break out a Q calculator or head over to www.rane.com/note170.html to gather my cheat sheets. Since the XMC does the math for us, this is a major score for the XMC-1 as it is much easier to visualize frequency difference then to visualize Q or measures of an octave. In the end, I am no longer sure how user friendly the PEQ is. Initially I was thinking that it would still be to cumbersome for users to work with, but as the reports come in to the forums, users are proving me wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by htguy on Oct 21, 2014 18:27:24 GMT -5
Yes the Q indicator is very useful.
Wondering how much down the two ends of the Q are relative to the center of Q. ie if the center is down 6 db how much down is it at either end?
|
|
|
|
Post by hidefdave on Oct 27, 2014 10:41:34 GMT -5
Hello everyone. I am fairly new here but have been following all these threads for a while and would like to add my first impressions of the XMC-1 which I receive last week.
First off let me explain how I got to to be an XMC-1 owner. Up until a year ago I had no experience with Emotiva gear. My music and home theater was based around an Onkyo TXN-905 receiver driving a set of 5 Mission speakers, 753 floor-standers at that the font, 751,s at the rear and a 75c center. These speakers are all 6 ohm and the floor-standers at the front dive down a lot lower than 6 ohms on occasion. After a while I noticed the Onkyo really struggling with this setup, especially during movies with HD soundtracks. So long story short, after a little research I decided to give Emotiva a try mainly because of their reputation for good affordable power amps so I got an XPA-5 and UMC-200. The XPA-5 finally controlled my speakers properly, I had never heard them so nicely controlled. The logical progression was to get the XMC-1 because as nice as the UMC-200 sounds I found its 2 channel music performance a little thin when using its DAC's. Analog pass-through from my Oppo 103 was fine. In addition I have a Linux music server and wanted a pre-pro with a USB DAC input plus I needed more HDMI inputs. So now I have had the XMC-1 for a few days here are my thoughts.
First impressions:
Out of the box my first thought was the build quality is very good, even the packaging has an air of quality about it. Connected it to the XPA-5 using XLR cables, hooked up my sources and powered up. Love the big OLED display. After setting up my speaker distances I started setting the levels using my Radio Shack SPL meter at the listing position and using the 65db test tones. For some reason the tones were around +15db hot, this was also the case for the 75 and 85db tones. In the end I elected to set my mains at 0db and bring everything else to match the fronts. Perhaps there is an issue with my meter, I will try again when I get a chance.
Listening experience music:
All my music is stored on a Linux server running MPD. The server recognized the XMC-1 when connected to the USB port. The XMC-1 was set to USB stream and reference stereo for all my listening. I can say the DAC's in this thing are very nice, the level of detail over the UMC-200 DAC's is subtle but to me its a warmer more revealing sound with a wider sound stage. Of course the downside to this is that poor recordings now sound worse, but well recorded material sounds great but its a nice problem to have.
Listening experience movies:
During my limited time with the unit I notice that there seems to be more detail and transient response on all channels. The center dialog is especially clear. The LFE also seems a lot cleaner, there is an overall "Wow that sounds good" and "I don't remember hearing that before" to the whole movie experience.
Minor Issues:
1) Test tones as mentioned above, but that could be my meter and hasn't stopped me enjoying the unit
2) Did notice that my audio level dropped way down from my Apple TV via HDMI, I had to do a restart on the XMC for bring it back.
3)Have noticed that the audio sample/Bit display is not what I would expect as others have noted. Sample rate changes as I would expect from my known sources like CD from my Oppo in on HDMI or FLAC from my server in on USB but bits is always displayed as 24 bits.
Unexpected bonus to users of 3D:
I have two display devices, one it a regular LCD TV with no 3D capability, my second device is an Epson 5020 which is 3D capable. When I used this setup with my UMC-200 I would split the HDMI out via an active splitter to both my display devices. The downside of doing this was that the HDMI out would see the lowest common denominator, i.e the TV and decide it couldn't pass the 3D info to the TV so the projector was recognized as 3D capable. This meant having to physically disconnect the TV HDMI to get it to work on the odd occasions I wanted 3D. The XMC seems to handle this situation and although I've just tried it once it just seems to work. In summary I would like to say so far I think this is a well engineered piece of equipment which I think was worth the wait. Why does work get in the way of listening.
|
|
|
|
Post by frenchyfranky on Oct 27, 2014 11:07:22 GMT -5
Tony, I think that the Dirac will be a deliverance for you!  Because of it easy to use. |
|
|
|
Post by ansat on Oct 27, 2014 11:30:42 GMT -5
Tony, I think that the Dirac will be a deliverance for you! Because of it easy to use. Frenchy, I personally don't care if it is easy to use or not. Everything makes perfect sense to me. It does play a huge factor in my recommendation to others. Hello everyone. I am fairly new here but have been following all these threads for a while and would like to add my first impressions of the XMC-1 which I receive last week. First off let me explain how I got to to be an XMC-1 owner. Up until a year ago I had no experience with Emotiva gear. My music and home theater was based around an Onkyo TXN-905 receiver driving a set of 5 Mission speakers, 753 floor-standers at that the font, 751,s at the rear and a 75c center. These speakers are all 6 ohm and the floor-standers at the front dive down a lot lower than 6 ohms on occasion. After a while I noticed the Onkyo really struggling with this setup, especially during movies with HD soundtracks. So long story short, after a little research I decided to give Emotiva a try mainly because of their reputation for good affordable power amps so I got an XPA-5 and UMC-200. The XPA-5 finally controlled my speakers properly, I had never heard them so nicely controlled. The logical progression was to get the XMC-1 because as nice as the UMC-200 sounds I found its 2 channel music performance a little thin when using its DAC's. Analog pass-through from my Oppo 103 was fine. In addition I have a Linux music server and wanted a pre-pro with a USB DAC input plus I needed more HDMI inputs. So now I have had the XMC-1 for a few days here are my thoughts. First impressions: Out of the box my first thought was the build quality is very good, even the packaging has an air of quality about it. Connected it to the XPA-5 using XLR cables, hooked up my sources and powered up. Love the big OLED display. After setting up my speaker distances I started setting the levels using my Radio Shack SPL meter at the listing position and using the 65db test tones. For some reason the tones were around +15db hot, this was also the case for the 75 and 85db tones. In the end I elected to set my mains at 0db and bring everything else to match the fronts. Perhaps there is an issue with my meter, I will try again when I get a chance. Listening experience music: All my music is stored on a Linux server running MPD. The server recognized the XMC-1 when connected to the USB port. The XMC-1 was set to USB stream and reference stereo for all my listening. I can say the DAC's in this thing are very nice, the level of detail over the UMC-200 DAC's is subtle but to me its a warmer more revealing sound with a wider sound stage. Of course the downside to this is that poor recordings now sound worse, but well recorded material sounds great but its a nice problem to have. Listening experience movies: During my limited time with the unit I notice that there seems to be more detail and transient response on all channels. The center dialog is especially clear. The LFE also seems a lot cleaner, there is an overall "Wow that sounds good" and "I don't remember hearing that before" to the whole movie experience. Minor Issues: 1) Test tones as mentioned above, but that could be my meter and hasn't stopped me enjoying the unit 2) Did notice that my audio level dropped way down from my Apple TV via HDMI, I had to do a restart on the XMC for bring it back. 3)Have noticed that the audio sample/Bit display is not what I would expect as others have noted. Sample rate changes as I would expect from my known sources like CD from my Oppo in on HDMI or FLAC from my server in on USB but bits is always displayed as 24 bits. Unexpected bonus to users of 3D: I have two display devices, one it a regular LCD TV with no 3D capability, my second device is an Epson 5020 which is 3D capable. When I used this setup with my UMC-200 I would split the HDMI out via an active splitter to both my display devices. The downside of doing this was that the HDMI out would see the lowest common denominator, i.e the TV and decide it couldn't pass the 3D info to the TV so the projector was recognized as 3D capable. This meant having to physically disconnect the TV HDMI to get it to work on the odd occasions I wanted 3D. The XMC seems to handle this situation and although I've just tried it once it just seems to work. In summary I would like to say so far I think this is a well engineered piece of equipment which I think was worth the wait. Why does work get in the way of listening. Nice review Dave. Your test tone issue sounds like you are using full bandwidth instead of the bandwidth limited tones to set the levels. Tony |
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Oct 27, 2014 12:28:10 GMT -5
Minor Issues: 1) Test tones as mentioned above, but that could be my meter and hasn't stopped me enjoying the unit 2) Did notice that my audio level dropped way down from my Apple TV via HDMI, I had to do a restart on the XMC for bring it back. 3)Have noticed that the audio sample/Bit display is not what I would expect as others have noted. Sample rate changes as I would expect from my known sources like CD from my Oppo in on HDMI or FLAC from my server in on USB but bits is always displayed as 24 bits.Don't worry about this one. It's not an issues (the XMC-1 " is" reporting accurately), but did have us all scratching our heads. Since most DACs nowadays are 24 bit "native", it only makes sense that devices "pad" to 24 bits to allow the DAC to operate in its optimal mode. Here's a LINK to the JRiver Wiki that explains audio bit depth. It may be worth a read... |
|
|
|
Post by hidefdave on Oct 27, 2014 12:47:15 GMT -5
Minor Issues: 1) Test tones as mentioned above, but that could be my meter and hasn't stopped me enjoying the unit 2) Did notice that my audio level dropped way down from my Apple TV via HDMI, I had to do a restart on the XMC for bring it back. 3)Have noticed that the audio sample/Bit display is not what I would expect as others have noted. Sample rate changes as I would expect from my known sources like CD from my Oppo in on HDMI or FLAC from my server in on USB but bits is always displayed as 24 bits.Don't worry about this one. It's not an issues (the XMC-1 " is" reporting accurately), but did have us all scratching our heads. Since most DACs nowadays are 24 bit "native", it only makes sense that devices "pad" to 24 bits to allow the DAC to operate in its optimal mode. Here's a LINK to the JRiver Wiki that explains audio bit depth. It may be worth a read... Thanks that's good to know, it does makes sense and makes no difference to the sound quality as the extra data is just zeros. |
|
LOL
