Preliminary XMC feature sets.

[flamingeye]

I think it`s O $hit ouch

[rudy]

Any chance for that USB port to be an active input source, to facilitate streaming music from the computer. I know I can buy an external DAC to do that, but since there's already a DAC in the unit, why not make that feature available?

I'm thinking of moving my entire CD collection, uncompressed, to the computer and streaming it over to the system for reproduction.

Also, I hope the wireless music server stays out of the design ....... forever. It really doesn't belong here.

Rudy

[Casey Leedom]

Jun 18, 2009 14:36:58 GMT -5 rudy said:

Any chance for that USB port to be an active input source, to facilitate streaming music from the computer. I know I can buy an external DAC to do that, but since there's already a DAC in the unit, why not make that feature available?

Why not just use a Squeeze Box, Roku or similar with a digital interconnect? That's an off the shelf solution that works great.

Also, I hope the wireless music server stays out of the design ....... forever. It really doesn't belong here.

Definitely! Less features is better! Especially when there are simple commodity solutions. For instance, the Logitech Squeeze Box has wireless capabilities and can hook up to the pre-processor via optical digital, coax digital, or analog.

Casey

[rudy]

Jun 19, 2009 1:56:44 GMT -5 Casey Leedom said:

Jun 18, 2009 14:36:58 GMT -5 rudy said:

Any chance for that USB port to be an active input source, to facilitate streaming music from the computer. I know I can buy an external DAC to do that, but since there's already a DAC in the unit, why not make that feature available?

Why not just use a Squeeze Box, Roku or similar with a digital interconnect? That's an off the shelf solution that works great.

Casey

Well mostly because its another gadget, with another interconnect, both potentially degrading sound quality, that don't need to be there. My question is, if the USB port is already there as is the DAC, how much effort is involved in making the USB into an input?
It may be a great amount of effort, in which case this feature should be left out. If it's a small amount of effort it may be worth considering. I just dunno.
The rest of the specs look great. I love the fact that there are dual balanced XLR outputs that can be hooked up to a pair of XPA-1s for audiophile music system.

While I'm on the subject of streaming. Anyone know, if there are players that will stream music/audio over HDMI. If so then the whole USB input would be a moot point, as I could use an HDMI connection from my computer to this pre.

Rudy

[SticknStones]

Looks like Sherwood is first and Outlaw next on integrating the Trinnov into their products. Interesting read! It will be interesting to see how this shapes the competitive landscape and one of the Outlaw representatives Peter Tribeman posted his comments on this as well.

I recommend reading post #99 and #110.

www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16697758&posted=1#post16697758

[jimbailey]

^ very interesting. Thanks, stick…

[Animo]

Curious now as to the comparisons between Emo-Q and Trinnov?

[flamingeye]

^+1

[fronn]

Jun 22, 2009 12:00:23 GMT -5 Animo said:

Curious now as to the comparisons between Emo-Q and Trinnov?

If anyone is expecting there to be any sort of comparison, they are expecting way too much.

Trinnov and Audyssey are both by companies that spend all their time doing just that. Emotiva's Emo-Q is going to be much closer to what's on the Yamaha's and HK's - the basic approach.

Emotiva doesn't have the resource to invest into something like that - they don't have the brains (clearly they aren't stupid, but they don't have a dozen people with high level education in just accoustics and their reactions to environment working on just room correction for several years) or the time. If anyone thinks the bit of resources Emotiva put into the mostly repackaged Cirrus solution is going to be better or even comparable to what a full time room correction company can put out, there are plenty of bridges that need owners.

The cost of designing either Audyssey or Trinnov alone probably exceeded Emotiva's cost of development on XMC-1 and UMC-1 put together. If anyone could put in a bit of effort and come out with something comparable, there'd be no reason for Audyssey or Trinnov to really exist.

I'm a fan of Emotiva and believe they build as solid of a product they can in the cost window, but let's be realistic... Emo-Q isn't a feature worth getting excited about, certainly not if you come from Audyssey. There are plenty of other things on the XMC-1 to be excited about, however.

[TRT]

Jun 23, 2009 9:26:17 GMT -5 fronn said:

Jun 22, 2009 12:00:23 GMT -5 Animo said:

Curious now as to the comparisons between Emo-Q and Trinnov?

If anyone is expecting there to be any sort of comparison, they are expecting way too much.

Trinnov and Audyssey are both by companies that spend all their time doing just that. Emotiva's Emo-Q is going to be much closer to what's on the Yamaha's and HK's - the basic approach.

Emotiva doesn't have the resource to invest into something like that - they don't have the brains (clearly they aren't stupid, but they don't have a dozen people with high level education in just accoustics and their reactions to environment working on just room correction for several years) or the time. If anyone thinks the bit of resources Emotiva put into the mostly repackaged Cirrus solution is going to be better or even comparable to what a full time room correction company can put out, there are plenty of bridges that need owners.

The cost of designing either Audyssey or Trinnov alone probably exceeded Emotiva's cost of development on XMC-1 and UMC-1 put together. If anyone could put in a bit of effort and come out with something comparable, there'd be no reason for Audyssey or Trinnov to really exist.

I'm a fan of Emotiva and believe they build as solid of a product they can in the cost window, but let's be realistic... Emo-Q isn't a feature worth getting excited about, certainly not if you come from Audyssey. There are plenty of other things on the XMC-1 to be excited about, however.

WOW! Maybe the Emo staff should post pictures of degrees earned at institutions of higher learning. Hey! I know! Let's all pony up a scholarship fund so we can send a Emo rep to M.I.T. Clearly, the products I have purchased from Emotiva were created by a bunch of country boys working out of a tree house. Where in the world did they find all of those materials? They must have used the remains from an old steel. Do you think that Emotiva's first attempt at speaker technology was two cups and a string? They don't have the brains to build a room equalization program? Huh? Please post comments BEFORE you start drinking.

[jasona]

Thanks for having the guts to say that - I was thinking it, but didn't have the cojones to post it

I agree that Emo-Q will probably be excellent for taking care of basic room problems - setting levels and delays, EQing basic room modes and things like that. But the spatial effects from something like Trinnov are massively complex. Now, bear in mind that these sorts of corrections have more effect in some rooms compared to others.

If you look past the couple of fanboy posts in the AVS thread (apparently from someone who has never heard Trinnov himself), I think there is still a lot of skepticism surrounding Trinnov. With Audyssey well established, I think people are hesitant to believe that Trinnov is quite as revolutionary as some people are claiming it to be. Another thing to note is that there are quite a few people that are more interested in the volume compensation features of the Audyssey systems (Dynamic EQ, Dynamic Volume). Those are technologies that a lot of people can benefit from, and the effects are easily discernable. While Emo-Q may not be as comprehensive or elaborate as Audyssey or Trinnov, the Emotiva processors will include Dolby Volume, which functions much the same as Audyssey's volume compensation features. I'm not kidding when I say that Dolby Volume is about the only reason my wife is letting me get a UMC-1 - being able to watch TV without going deaf from the commercials and being able to hear dialog in a movie without subsequently getting knocked off the couch with the explosions.

[Lonnie]

Jun 23, 2009 9:48:45 GMT -5 jasona said:

Thanks for having the guts to say that - I was thinking it, but didn't have the cojones to post it

I agree that Emo-Q will probably be excellent for taking care of basic room problems - setting levels and delays, EQing basic room modes and things like that. But the spatial effects from something like Trinnov are massively complex. Now, bear in mind that these sorts of corrections have more effect in some rooms compared to others.

If you look past the couple of fanboy posts in the AVS thread (apparently from someone who has never heard Trinnov himself), I think there is still a lot of skepticism surrounding Trinnov. With Audyssey well established, I think people are hesitant to believe that Trinnov is quite as revolutionary as some people are claiming it to be. Another thing to note is that there are quite a few people that are more interested in the volume compensation features of the Audyssey systems (Dynamic EQ, Dynamic Volume). Those are technologies that a lot of people can benefit from, and the effects are easily discernable. While Emo-Q may not be as comprehensive or elaborate as Audyssey or Trinnov, the Emotiva processors will include Dolby Volume, which functions much the same as Audyssey's volume compensation features. I'm not kidding when I say that Dolby Volume is about the only reason my wife is letting me get a UMC-1 - being able to watch TV without going deaf from the commercials and being able to hear dialog in a movie without subsequently getting knocked off the couch with the explosions.

The engineers who work for Emotiva, developing things like 'Emo-Q' are world class, top-of-the-heap people who have been, and are involved in developing for many differenct companies.

My point is that what someone may think is a simple, cheap 'Emo-Q' maybe actually be something that was painstakingly developed for multiple companies, and not a low budget venture.

Dan L. would not use an EQ system if he felt it was inferior.

[jasona]

Jun 23, 2009 9:43:11 GMT -5 TRT said:

WOW! Maybe the Emo staff should post pictures of degrees earned at institutions of higher learning. Hey! I know! Let's all pony up a scholarship fund so we can send a Emo rep to M.I.T. Clearly, the products I have purchased from Emotiva were created by a bunch of country boys working out of a tree house. Where in the world did they find all of those materials? They must have used the remains from an old steel. Do you think that Emotiva's first attempt at speaker technology was two cups and a string? They don't have the brains to build a room equalization program? Huh? Please post comments BEFORE you start drinking.

Yikes, I think your interpreting his comments a little more negatively than they were intended. He's just trying to point out that while the Emo-Q system will provide some basic room correction, it's probably not going to be in the same league as Audyssey and Trinnov in terms of complexity. I think the point was that these are companies that have a long history of developing their products and have already earned a high pedigree... and that normally only happens when you have a lot of people working on the problem over the course of many years. I don't think the intent was to bad-mouth Emotiva or it's employees, but rather to suggest that we shouldn't be setting unrealistic goals for what the Emo-Q corrections will be able to do.

- edit -

I see Dann posted just before me, and makes an excellent point. Emotiva has a much larger staff than most of us are aware of and it's not fair to claim the capabilities of the Emo-Q system when none of us have ANY experience with it. I still think it's prudent for us to have realistic expectations (for any technology). And we also need to bear in mind that it's pretty astonishing the capabilities that are being built into the UMC-1 at it's price point. Absolutely no question that this is the price/performance KING.

[monkumonku]

Jun 23, 2009 9:43:11 GMT -5 TRT said:

Jun 23, 2009 9:26:17 GMT -5 fronn said:

If anyone is expecting there to be any sort of comparison, they are expecting way too much.

Trinnov and Audyssey are both by companies that spend all their time doing just that. Emotiva's Emo-Q is going to be much closer to what's on the Yamaha's and HK's - the basic approach.

Emotiva doesn't have the resource to invest into something like that - they don't have the brains (clearly they aren't stupid, but they don't have a dozen people with high level education in just accoustics and their reactions to environment working on just room correction for several years) or the time. If anyone thinks the bit of resources Emotiva put into the mostly repackaged Cirrus solution is going to be better or even comparable to what a full time room correction company can put out, there are plenty of bridges that need owners.

The cost of designing either Audyssey or Trinnov alone probably exceeded Emotiva's cost of development on XMC-1 and UMC-1 put together. If anyone could put in a bit of effort and come out with something comparable, there'd be no reason for Audyssey or Trinnov to really exist.

I'm a fan of Emotiva and believe they build as solid of a product they can in the cost window, but let's be realistic... Emo-Q isn't a feature worth getting excited about, certainly not if you come from Audyssey. There are plenty of other things on the XMC-1 to be excited about, however.

WOW! Maybe the Emo staff should post pictures of degrees earned at institutions of higher learning. Hey! I know! Let's all pony up a scholarship fund so we can send a Emo rep to M.I.T. Clearly, the products I have purchased from Emotiva were created by a bunch of country boys working out of a tree house. Where in the world did they find all of those materials? They must have used the remains from an old steel. Do you think that Emotiva's first attempt at speaker technology was two cups and a string? They don't have the brains to build a room equalization program? Huh? Please post comments BEFORE you start drinking.

Wasn't Emo originally started by Forrest Gump? ;D

[DYohn]

Jun 23, 2009 9:26:17 GMT -5 fronn said:

Jun 22, 2009 12:00:23 GMT -5 Animo said:

Curious now as to the comparisons between Emo-Q and Trinnov?

If anyone is expecting there to be any sort of comparison, they are expecting way too much.

Trinnov and Audyssey are both by companies that spend all their time doing just that. Emotiva's Emo-Q is going to be much closer to what's on the Yamaha's and HK's - the basic approach.

Emotiva doesn't have the resource to invest into something like that - they don't have the brains (clearly they aren't stupid, but they don't have a dozen people with high level education in just accoustics and their reactions to environment working on just room correction for several years) or the time. If anyone thinks the bit of resources Emotiva put into the mostly repackaged Cirrus solution is going to be better or even comparable to what a full time room correction company can put out, there are plenty of bridges that need owners.

The cost of designing either Audyssey or Trinnov alone probably exceeded Emotiva's cost of development on XMC-1 and UMC-1 put together. If anyone could put in a bit of effort and come out with something comparable, there'd be no reason for Audyssey or Trinnov to really exist.

I'm a fan of Emotiva and believe they build as solid of a product they can in the cost window, but let's be realistic... Emo-Q isn't a feature worth getting excited about, certainly not if you come from Audyssey. There are plenty of other things on the XMC-1 to be excited about, however.

I am reminded of a Buggs Bunny quote concerning maroons.

[jmilton]

Jun 23, 2009 9:56:20 GMT -5 Lonnie said:

Jun 23, 2009 9:48:45 GMT -5 jasona said:

Thanks for having the guts to say that - I was thinking it, but didn't have the cojones to post it

I agree that Emo-Q will probably be excellent for taking care of basic room problems - setting levels and delays, EQing basic room modes and things like that. But the spatial effects from something like Trinnov are massively complex. Now, bear in mind that these sorts of corrections have more effect in some rooms compared to others.



If you look past the couple of fanboy posts in the AVS thread (apparently from someone who has never heard Trinnov himself), I think there is still a lot of skepticism surrounding Trinnov. With Audyssey well established, I think people are hesitant to believe that Trinnov is quite as revolutionary as some people are claiming it to be. Another thing to note is that there are quite a few people that are more interested in the volume compensation features of the Audyssey systems (Dynamic EQ, Dynamic Volume). Those are technologies that a lot of people can benefit from, and the effects are easily discernable. While Emo-Q may not be as comprehensive or elaborate as Audyssey or Trinnov, the Emotiva processors will include Dolby Volume, which functions much the same as Audyssey's volume compensation features. I'm not kidding when I say that Dolby Volume is about the only reason my wife is letting me get a UMC-1 - being able to watch TV without going deaf from the commercials and being able to hear dialog in a movie without subsequently getting knocked off the couch with the explosions.

The engineers who work for Emotiva, developing things like 'Emo-Q' are world class, top-of-the-heap people who have been, and are involved in developing for many differenct companies.

My point is that what someone may think is a simple, cheap 'Emo-Q' maybe actually be something that was painstakingly developed for multiple companies, and not a low budget venture.

Dan L. would not use an EQ system if he felt it was inferior.

The Emo kitty gives it 4 paws up....that's all I need to know!

[flamingeye]

I don`t expect EmoEq to be like trinnov just curious how some things may compar , I just need something good for a starting point then I can tweak from there ,hopefully something better then yamaha`s because yamahas is so inconsistent it`s hard to get a good starting point with out running it several times and hope there is 2 out of 5 runs that are close enough to use as a starting point + I hope it has something to save the settings

[Accurus]

I am sure that the EMO-Q will be wonderful. I doubt Emotiva would develop something in house just so that it was the same as everyone else. It will probably be a fews steps ahead of everyone else.

[oscartheclimber]

Isn't the Trinnov adding $300 to the SN?

I'm sure we'll see the most of the benefits without the Trinnov licensing fee added to the MSRP.

[TRT]

Jun 23, 2009 9:56:23 GMT -5 jasona said:

Jun 23, 2009 9:43:11 GMT -5 TRT said:

WOW! Maybe the Emo staff should post pictures of degrees earned at institutions of higher learning. Hey! I know! Let's all pony up a scholarship fund so we can send a Emo rep to M.I.T. Clearly, the products I have purchased from Emotiva were created by a bunch of country boys working out of a tree house. Where in the world did they find all of those materials? They must have used the remains from an old steel. Do you think that Emotiva's first attempt at speaker technology was two cups and a string? They don't have the brains to build a room equalization program? Huh? Please post comments BEFORE you start drinking.

Yikes, I think your interpreting his comments a little more negatively than they were intended. He's just trying to point out that while the Emo-Q system will provide some basic room correction, it's probably not going to be in the same league as Audyssey and Trinnov in terms of complexity. I think the point was that these are companies that have a long history of developing their products and have already earned a high pedigree... and that normally only happens when you have a lot of people working on the problem over the course of many years. I don't think the intent was to bad-mouth Emotiva or it's employees, but rather to suggest that we shouldn't be setting unrealistic goals for what the Emo-Q corrections will be able to do.

- edit -

I see Dann posted just before me, and makes an excellent point. Emotiva has a much larger staff than most of us are aware of and it's not fair to claim the capabilities of the Emo-Q system when none of us have ANY experience with it. I still think it's prudent for us to have realistic expectations (for any technology). And we also need to bear in mind that it's pretty astonishing the capabilities that are being built into the UMC-1 at it's price point. Absolutely no question that this is the price/performance KING.

...sort 'a' like you interpreted mine? I read it. I commented. Option B: Accept the post verbatum, and not buy the product because someone in (Do Drop In, ND) writes about Emotiva's lack of competence? I think, not! Now if fronn is the associate director and primary engineer at the national accelerator lab in charge of particle smashing, I'll give the post its fair due.