Sound & Vision Magazine Forgets The XMC-1?
Jan 11, 2016 21:48:45 GMT -5
frenchyfranky, adaboy, and 1 more like this
Post by Bonzo on Jan 11, 2016 21:48:45 GMT -5
I got my latest edition the other day and finally got to look at it tonight. It's their yearly "Top Picks Of The Year" edition, and guess what, no mention of the XMC-1. Technically the XMC-1 came out in 2014 so one might have expected a review in 2014 (where it could have been compared to the Krell Foundation, which I find to be it's most direct competition). But I think S&V respectfully waited to review the XMC-1 to give Emotiva some time to work out some of the early going bugs. The review came out on June 23, 2015, which made it a contender for this year. And like I said, no mention of it. In other words, it got beat.
By what you ask? The Yamaha Aventage CX-A5100 and the Marantz AV8802.
Now the first thing I want to dispel are people who tend to always jump on that "you can't trust magazine reviews because they always favor their advertisers; it's all about the money." That may be the case with some brands and in some cases, but here I say B.S. to that. The Krell got nothing but fanatical raves last year, and I have not seen a single S&V Krell ad that I can recall, ever. I'm sure they may have, but it's been a long time, and or far and few in-between. I do know that Marantz and Yamaha advertise in S&V, but it's not consistently done each and every month. On the other hand, Emotiva has had an ad in what I believe to be every single issue of S&V for many years now. There may have been one here or there, but since I've known of Emotiva I can't recall a single S&V without an expensive full page ad inside. So if the money train B.S. was for real here, then Emotiva should have received some free accolades.
Why do I think it wasn't mentioned? Well this is just my opinion, but I have 2 thoughts. The release timing of the XMC-1 was unfortunately late to the world home theater surround processing stage. I am certainly not one to call it "obsolete" as others would say (because I don't think 5.1 and 7.1 are going anywhere soon). But as are things with the electronics world, the latest and greatest is all most people tend to care about (Like it or not, Atmos and DTS:X are coming, and they will be the standard very soon). In other words, an XMC-1 in 2012 would have set the world on fire. 2013 would have made people jump. 2014 just made people raise their heads. A review of such a product in 2015 was almost behind the times. Again, I use the the word "unfortunate." It's kind of like an awesome performing car that in 2016 only has 350 hp. It gets lost in the shuffle of the 500+ hp cars. My second thought is tried and true tested reliability. I don't think Emotiva has earned any reputation here like the other brands. The new kid on the block does not usually get to stand on the podium. Unfair as this may be, I still see it part of the equation. Considering all the issues I've read about with their previous processors, I'd say it's a valid concern.
But I also have to wonder about all the people who dispel major brands as not being able to "sound" great. Let me quote S&V directly. Regarding the Yamaha, "Yamaha's latest and most advanced 11.1-channel surround sound processor delivers Atmos and DTS:X compliance, audiophile sound quality, and built in MusicCast multiroom audio capability." Regarding the Marantz, "The 11.1-channel Marantz AV8802 is totally future-proofed for all forms of object-based audio and 4K video, features Audyssey's best room correction, and delivered a noticeable improvement in sound quality over its predecessor and other contenders." I bolded and underlined the key points. Everyone here likes to brag about how good the XMC-1 sounds. I'd say from these remarks, S&V thinks these 2 units sound better than the XMC-1, at least with HT in mind for sure. I'd certainly like to point out the words "other contenders." I think that includes the XMC-1. I'm sure many people here might say otherwise, but how many folks here have actually done a direct side by side comparison? Very few if any I can tell you that. Blind testing? Um, probably 1 or 2. Even one unit after the other? Not many. So most comments on that from folks here would be pure speculation or conjecture, and that's why I find magazine reviews helpful, because they have listened to them all, not to mention they most likely have way more experience than most people on some internet forum (except maybe boomzilla who has gone through about 500 sets of speakers in just the last 3 years!!!
)
But let's say I give them the benefit of the doubt and say these 2 units sound superb, as does the XMC-1. (If you want to claim they sound like schiit while the XMC-1 stands head and shoulders above them, I say see the last paragraph). So what then?
Well the Yamaha costs $3000, and the Marantz costs $4000. That's a mighty big jump over the XMC-1. I'm not sure it's worth it myself. The XMC-1 has tons of great things going for it, and I'm not going to argue that. S&V is usually the magazine that puts value above all else, so why did they forget about the XMC-1? When you think about it, it's not like the extra money for the Y or M is going for nothing. Both these units are way more future proofed than the upgrade-able (limited as it may be) XMC-1. Both these units have many features the XMC-1 can't do (and will never do). All the units have a lot of inputs (I like how these 2 have more analog inputs than the XMC-1 but totally frown on them for having less digital inputs and not a single digital output which is a huge sin for me). I'd argue that these units could potentially be more reliable than the XMC-1, but that would be pure speculation on my part (although there have been plenty of issues with the XMC-1 on this forum and to say there haven't would be burying your head in the sand in my book, aka typical I.T. computer geek for "sure there are bugs but you unknowing lowly people are A.H.s for harping on it; deal with it because it's just the way things are" B.S.). Both these units are made by companies that will most likely still be around 10 years from now in one form or another (Emotiva could go out in 2016 so screw that 5 year warranty argument). Then lastly, if I were purely a vain person judging only on looks, I'd pick the Marantz, then the XMC-1 (would be first if it still had Gen 1 silver), then the totally fugly Yamaha.
So that's my 2 cents. Discuss as you will. What say you as to why the XMC-1 was left out in the cold?
Cheers ---- Bonzo
By what you ask? The Yamaha Aventage CX-A5100 and the Marantz AV8802.
Now the first thing I want to dispel are people who tend to always jump on that "you can't trust magazine reviews because they always favor their advertisers; it's all about the money." That may be the case with some brands and in some cases, but here I say B.S. to that. The Krell got nothing but fanatical raves last year, and I have not seen a single S&V Krell ad that I can recall, ever. I'm sure they may have, but it's been a long time, and or far and few in-between. I do know that Marantz and Yamaha advertise in S&V, but it's not consistently done each and every month. On the other hand, Emotiva has had an ad in what I believe to be every single issue of S&V for many years now. There may have been one here or there, but since I've known of Emotiva I can't recall a single S&V without an expensive full page ad inside. So if the money train B.S. was for real here, then Emotiva should have received some free accolades.
Why do I think it wasn't mentioned? Well this is just my opinion, but I have 2 thoughts. The release timing of the XMC-1 was unfortunately late to the world home theater surround processing stage. I am certainly not one to call it "obsolete" as others would say (because I don't think 5.1 and 7.1 are going anywhere soon). But as are things with the electronics world, the latest and greatest is all most people tend to care about (Like it or not, Atmos and DTS:X are coming, and they will be the standard very soon). In other words, an XMC-1 in 2012 would have set the world on fire. 2013 would have made people jump. 2014 just made people raise their heads. A review of such a product in 2015 was almost behind the times. Again, I use the the word "unfortunate." It's kind of like an awesome performing car that in 2016 only has 350 hp. It gets lost in the shuffle of the 500+ hp cars. My second thought is tried and true tested reliability. I don't think Emotiva has earned any reputation here like the other brands. The new kid on the block does not usually get to stand on the podium. Unfair as this may be, I still see it part of the equation. Considering all the issues I've read about with their previous processors, I'd say it's a valid concern.
But I also have to wonder about all the people who dispel major brands as not being able to "sound" great. Let me quote S&V directly. Regarding the Yamaha, "Yamaha's latest and most advanced 11.1-channel surround sound processor delivers Atmos and DTS:X compliance, audiophile sound quality, and built in MusicCast multiroom audio capability." Regarding the Marantz, "The 11.1-channel Marantz AV8802 is totally future-proofed for all forms of object-based audio and 4K video, features Audyssey's best room correction, and delivered a noticeable improvement in sound quality over its predecessor and other contenders." I bolded and underlined the key points. Everyone here likes to brag about how good the XMC-1 sounds. I'd say from these remarks, S&V thinks these 2 units sound better than the XMC-1, at least with HT in mind for sure. I'd certainly like to point out the words "other contenders." I think that includes the XMC-1. I'm sure many people here might say otherwise, but how many folks here have actually done a direct side by side comparison? Very few if any I can tell you that. Blind testing? Um, probably 1 or 2. Even one unit after the other? Not many. So most comments on that from folks here would be pure speculation or conjecture, and that's why I find magazine reviews helpful, because they have listened to them all, not to mention they most likely have way more experience than most people on some internet forum (except maybe boomzilla who has gone through about 500 sets of speakers in just the last 3 years!!!
)But let's say I give them the benefit of the doubt and say these 2 units sound superb, as does the XMC-1. (If you want to claim they sound like schiit while the XMC-1 stands head and shoulders above them, I say see the last paragraph). So what then?
Well the Yamaha costs $3000, and the Marantz costs $4000. That's a mighty big jump over the XMC-1. I'm not sure it's worth it myself. The XMC-1 has tons of great things going for it, and I'm not going to argue that. S&V is usually the magazine that puts value above all else, so why did they forget about the XMC-1? When you think about it, it's not like the extra money for the Y or M is going for nothing. Both these units are way more future proofed than the upgrade-able (limited as it may be) XMC-1. Both these units have many features the XMC-1 can't do (and will never do). All the units have a lot of inputs (I like how these 2 have more analog inputs than the XMC-1 but totally frown on them for having less digital inputs and not a single digital output which is a huge sin for me). I'd argue that these units could potentially be more reliable than the XMC-1, but that would be pure speculation on my part (although there have been plenty of issues with the XMC-1 on this forum and to say there haven't would be burying your head in the sand in my book, aka typical I.T. computer geek for "sure there are bugs but you unknowing lowly people are A.H.s for harping on it; deal with it because it's just the way things are" B.S.). Both these units are made by companies that will most likely still be around 10 years from now in one form or another (Emotiva could go out in 2016 so screw that 5 year warranty argument). Then lastly, if I were purely a vain person judging only on looks, I'd pick the Marantz, then the XMC-1 (would be first if it still had Gen 1 silver), then the totally fugly Yamaha.
So that's my 2 cents. Discuss as you will. What say you as to why the XMC-1 was left out in the cold?
Cheers ---- Bonzo
)