klinemj
Emo VIPs 
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,739
|
Post by klinemj on May 19, 2016 20:01:32 GMT -5
Mark, does the UMC-1 or UMC-200 have dual-core 32-bit DSP engines like the new MC-700 ? Also I wonder if they made changes to the Emo-Q room correction. I can't recall what DSP engines they had, and that didn't seem to matter to the OP. I thought bluetooth did, but I guess not. On the MC-700, IIRC, they did say it has EmoQ-2 or something. So, it sounds new. How? I have not seen (and won't really care unless people say it beats DIRAC.) Mark |
|
|
|
Post by Axis on May 20, 2016 13:18:12 GMT -5
Mark, does the UMC-1 or UMC-200 have dual-core 32-bit DSP engines like the new MC-700 ? Also I wonder if they made changes to the Emo-Q room correction. I can't recall what DSP engines they had, and that didn't seem to matter to the OP. I thought bluetooth did, but I guess not. On the MC-700, IIRC, they did say it has EmoQ-2 or something. So, it sounds new. How? I have not seen (and won't really care unless people say it beats DIRAC.) Mark Mark, I was not trying to second guess you. I can see a thread pretty soon that talks all about the old compared to the new. The MC-700 may be that UMC-500 that everyone was looking forward too. And better ! |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,739
|
Post by klinemj on May 20, 2016 13:51:04 GMT -5
I was not trying to second guess you. I can see a thread pretty soon that talks all about the old compared to the new. The MC-700 may be that UMC-500 that everyone was looking forward too. And better ! No worries - I didn't take it like that at all. On the UMC-500, the MC-700 doesn't look like it to me. I seem to recall the UMC-500 was going to have some XLR outs, and the MC-700 doesn't look tall enough to include those and RCA's. I think the MC-700 is really just a mild revision on the UMC-200 (just based on what the pictures look like...no other info makes it clear yet...) with updated HDMI compatibility, some new variation on EmoQ, and who knows what else. Mark |
|
|
|
Post by Axis on May 20, 2016 13:56:00 GMT -5
I was not trying to second guess you. I can see a thread pretty soon that talks all about the old compared to the new. The MC-700 may be that UMC-500 that everyone was looking forward too. And better ! No worries - I didn't take it like that at all. On the UMC-500, the MC-700 doesn't look like it to me. I seem to recall the UMC-500 was going to have some XLR outs, and the MC-700 doesn't look tall enough to include those and RCA's. I think the MC-700 is really just a mild revision on the UMC-200 (just based on what the pictures look like...no other info makes it clear yet...) with updated HDMI compatibility, some new variation on EmoQ, and who knows what else. Mark I forgot about XLR outputs. Does everyone really need them. Single Ended can perform excellent. Just saying. |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,739
|
Post by klinemj on May 20, 2016 13:57:58 GMT -5
I forgot about XLR outputs. Does everyone really need them. Single Ended can perform excellent. Just saying. I agree - even more so because as I recall, the circuitry was not going to be fully balanced, just XLR connections. Mark |
|
|
|
Post by inventor on May 20, 2016 14:09:38 GMT -5
XLR (from an EMI stance) only matters over 6' (also, if you have to run RCA's with power wires). typically a good RCA is 100% shielded, it just depends on how the connector is assembled. i would love to have XLR connectors only because i have a really good twisted pair cable (scrap from work) that sounds amazing! it's blown all the other RCA's i've tried so far (granted, most of those are not $500 cables). to keep my personal cable 100% shielded, i keep the entire shield intact until it's inside the connector.
|
|
|
|
Post by 2muchht on May 20, 2016 16:36:02 GMT -5
...does the UMC-1 or UMC-200 have dual-core 32-bit DSP engines like the new MC-700 ? Also I wonder if they made changes to the Emo-Q room correction. For those who are into this sort of thing, the mention of "dual-core DSP" leads one to lean towards the TI Aureus series which includes the DA-7xx series used in the XMC-1 or the newer DA-8xx series that is very popular in the AVR world and is probably what will be used (ore than one, of course) in the Atmos update for the XMC. The alternatives would be ADI SHARC, which is not likely here, or the older dual-core Cirrus used in the UMC-1 or UMC-200. Those are much better than many here might believe, but they are definitely outdated. Newer Cirrus DSP solutions are triple- or quad-core. As has long been said, implementation is key, and that is what governs the quality of the end result. I guess the proof will be in the pudding. |
|
|
|
Post by Axis on May 20, 2016 16:38:10 GMT -5
For those who are into this sort of thing, the mention of "dual-core DSP" leads one to lean towards the TI Aureus series which includes the DA-7xx series used in the XMC-1 or the newer DA-8xx series that is very popular in the AVR world and is probably what will be used (ore than one, of course) in the Atmos update for the XMC. The alternatives would be ADI SHARC, which is not likely here, or the older dual-core Cirrus used in the UMC-1 or UMC-200. Those are much better than many here might believe, but they are definitely outdated. Newer Cirrus DSP solutions are triple- or quad-core. As has long been said, implementation is key, and that is what governs the quality of the end result. I guess the proof will be in the pudding. What is two much saying everyone ? |
|
|
|
Post by 2muchht on May 20, 2016 17:45:29 GMT -5
Axis: My bad for not being clear enough as to the reason for my post. As you can now see, I've edited my post to indicate that the gibberish I've spouted is in response to your question earlier on in this thread about DSP options. I hope that helps clears it up. I took your comment to wonder about DSP, and given that there are really three companies in that space I offered my opinion.
|
|
