|
|
Post by mgbpuff on May 16, 2018 13:21:25 GMT -5
I don't know that I agree with the last two posts. According to the member list, there are about 21,500 members on the Lounge. That's a pretty significant number of people who are obviously interested in A/V equipment. When was the last time you deleted a forum account you weren't using? I'd guess there are about 1500 "active" members here. And the same 100 or so who come on here regularly to complain about missed deadlines. Sorry, I forgot you get a thrill out of 'exact guessing' (an obvious oxymoron)I. |
|
|
|
Post by thrillcat on May 16, 2018 13:25:56 GMT -5
When was the last time you deleted a forum account you weren't using? I'd guess there are about 1500 "active" members here. And the same 100 or so who come on here regularly to complain about missed deadlines. Sorry, I forgot you get a thrill out of 'exact guessing' (an obvious oxymoron)I. Well, you got your number by looking up the forum members. I got my number by looking up how many members have been active in the past 24 hours, and generously tripling that number. The 100 number is from being here every day, and seeing the same 100 or so people saying the same thing over and over. Sometimes complaining in creative ways (my shipping box is in the corner ready to send out), but mostly saying the same thing, over and over and over and over and over. Remind me again, what's that thing they say about the definition of crazy? |
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on May 16, 2018 13:30:49 GMT -5
I don't know! Maybe using the same word 'over' seven times in a 3 sentence post! o.k. 5 sentence post!
|
|
|
|
Post by cwt on May 16, 2018 13:47:16 GMT -5
Indeed it stands to reason due to complaints over cec and the current implementation . They admit as much @ hdmi.org . Anything that may replace vieralink ;anynet proprietary methods etc with a true standardised formula is a ok  |
|
|
|
Post by lrobertson on May 16, 2018 14:00:33 GMT -5
They’ve done the studies. Bad publicity is better than no publicity. We can knock em as much as we want but probably doesn’t hurt them but only overall helps them in the end. All things will be forgivin if the RMC-1 delivers on their promises at least for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on May 16, 2018 14:24:56 GMT -5
I first built this spreadsheet back when people were trying to decide between keeping their UMC-1 or getting an XMC-1, it had the PT-7030 in there too. I've started to update it to include the 4 possible options people may be faced with in the next few months -- XMC-1, XMC-1 w/HDMI & Atmos, XMC-1G3 (aka XMC-2), RMC-1. I think it helps point out the differences and may make it easier to decide if it's better to upgrade or replace. It's far from complete, in some places I've just copied and pasted as a place to start, other places (like RMC chipsets) I haven't even tried to look up what we know. I thought I'd post it here, though it could easily be in a couple other threads. If people like it I'll update it as more information is revealed, or as you point out my errors and omissions, suggestions and information are welcome. I'm experimenting with the best format to post here (I'm using Numbers on my iPad and Mac), I used to just post a screenshot in jpeg, but PDF might be more readable. I'll post both and see what people like. So here's the first crack at it, I've highlighted the items with differences in blue. Let me know what you think. Edit: (09/26/2018) I have started a new thread where you will find an updated version of the spreadsheet, as such I’m deleting the spreadsheet below as it is now inaccurate.
The Emotiva Processor Comparison—2018/19 |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on May 16, 2018 15:43:10 GMT -5
So just because you don't want, don't like or can't fit ceiling speakers you shouldn't dismiss Atmos and you should definitely not dismiss DTS-X. That's why I said "I PERSONALLY don't give a whoop..." and "I understand it works for some people." But you go ahead and take offense like I just insulted your mother. My entire point was that matrixing extra channels, upmixing, is what Dolby ProLogic did. And using ProLogic-style technology when the capability is already there in the hardware and software is a terrible business practice. Even if I PERSONALLY don't care about Atmos, I still want them to implement it to the fullest of its capability. But you go ahead and take offense like I just insulted your mother. I meant no offence and I'm sorry if you took it that I did. My point was that a lot of people dismiss Atmos/DST-X because they have a small room and ceilng speakers don't appeal. I believe that is a mistake, because there are other advantages that can be heard which don't relate to 32 speaker systems. Again I apologise if you took it any other way. Cheers Gary |
|
richb
Sensei
Oppo Beta Group - Audioholics Reviewer
Posts: 889
|
Post by richb on May 16, 2018 15:47:48 GMT -5
Indeed it stands to reason due to complaints over cec and the current implementation . They admit as much @ hdmi.org . Anything that may replace vieralink ;anynet proprietary methods etc with a true standardised formula is a ok To be fair, HDMI CEC was *supposed* to compatible but the name for the feature was not properly standardized so each vendor made up their own brand. It could be all flavors were different but there was a standard. - Rich |
|
|
|
Post by thrillcat on May 16, 2018 15:52:41 GMT -5
That's why I said "I PERSONALLY don't give a whoop..." and "I understand it works for some people." But you go ahead and take offense like I just insulted your mother. My entire point was that matrixing extra channels, upmixing, is what Dolby ProLogic did. And using ProLogic-style technology when the capability is already there in the hardware and software is a terrible business practice. Even if I PERSONALLY don't care about Atmos, I still want them to implement it to the fullest of its capability. But you go ahead and take offense like I just insulted your mother. I meant no offence and I'm sorry if you took it that I did. My point was that a lot of people dismiss Atmos/DST-X because they have a small room and ceilng speakers don't appeal. I believe that is a mistake, because there are other advantages that can be heard which don't relate to 32 speaker systems. Again I apologise if you took it any other way. Cheers Gary I'm one of those. I have heard many Atmos/X/Auro setups. Some of the best possible setups, while working CEDIA. I get it, it just doesn't do enough for me, even at that scale, to feel the value in my room. But it's a technology. It's a feature that can/does/could add a new level of enjoyment for many people, and to see the industry shortchanging the technology ticks me off. |
|
|
|
Post by petew on May 16, 2018 19:54:48 GMT -5
I first built this spreadsheet back when people were trying to decide between keeping their UMC-1 or getting an XMC-1, it had the PT-7030 in there too. I've started to update it to include the 4 possible options people may be faced with in the next few months -- XMC-1, XMC-1 w/HDMI & Atmos, XMC-1G3 (aka XMC-2), RMC-1. I think it helps point out the differences and may make it easier to decide if it's better to upgrade or replace. It's far from complete, in some places I've just copied and pasted as a place to start, other places (like RMC chipsets) I haven't even tried to look up what we know. I thought I'd post it here, though it could easily be in a couple other threads. If people like it I'll update it as more information is revealed, or as you point out my errors and omissions, suggestions and information are welcome. I'm experimenting with the best format to post here (I'm using Numbers on my iPad and Mac), I used to just post a screenshot in jpeg, but PDF might be more readable. I'll post both and see what people like. So here's the first crack at it, I've highlighted the items with differences in blue. Let me know what you think. View AttachmentView AttachmentThe spreadsheet is a good start! Makes the XMC-1 G3 look like a compelling choice. Couple of comments though: - how about a separate spec for the CPU (running Linux) and the DSP (doing the decoding). - the table lists the TI DA710 for the atmos upgraded XMC-1 gen 2. I'm pretty sure the TI part is being replaced with new ADI parts on the Atmos upgrade, as with the XMC-1G3 and RMC-1 |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on May 16, 2018 23:08:14 GMT -5
The spreadsheet is a good start! Makes the XMC-1 G3 look like a compelling choice. Couple of comments though: - how about a separate spec for the CPU (running Linux) and the DSP (doing the decoding). - the table lists the TI DA710 for the atmos upgraded XMC-1 gen 2. I'm pretty sure the TI part is being replaced with new ADI parts on the Atmos upgrade, as with the XMC-1G3 and RMC-1 Yes, that was a cut and paste, I'd be happy to add a line for DSP and update it when I know what they are? Originally the chips and sets were a compelling reason to get the XMC-1 even though (most people?) don't care what the chips are as long as they do what they do, but we need to know what the differences and capabilities are. It's been a while since I created this, when I updated it I had to remove analog video (sorry Bonzo)  The upgrade still looks good to me ... but then so does an RMC-1. I will soapbox with those who think the XMC-2 is a better name, the chassis is very different, it's a new machine. If the DC-2 gets a 2 why not the XMC-2? |
|
|
|
Post by cwt on May 17, 2018 2:27:04 GMT -5
having the 7.1.4 a hybrid when it switches to pcm for up mixing is it possible something a little more proprietary and discrete can take place or is everyone pretty sure it’s old school matrixing? In pcm it sees no objects then and sees the height as an individual layer of speakers or does it not even read the heights as heights at that point? I would still think that format being new Dolby would update their surround mixer to have a better ability to handle it how you’d hope. Wishful thinking though. I would definitely say the larger the room and higher the ceilings the more practical Atmos becomes. Its safe to say its just matrixing imo as it was intended/designed to be a stopgap for upmixing standard bd's until more uhd ones with discrete came about ;)Apart from that it uses phase and splitting frequencies which aren't conducive to object steering but are like ambience extraction generally used by these types of dsp modes ;is the way I look at it .. And if it were not a similar type to pl2x/z why deep six those as everyone but Yamaha has done ;)And we all know Yamaha is a basket case when it comes to dsp modes  |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on May 17, 2018 2:47:28 GMT -5
I would definitely say the larger the room and higher the ceilings the more practical Atmos becomes. Based on real world experience I can't agree, my friend has a 5.1.2 set up in a quite smallish room and it sounds fantastic, way better than 5.1 Dolby True HD or DTS HDMA. So much so that he upgraded his cheapass Yamaha AVR (that he bought a couple of years ago and had 4K and Atmos/DTS-X) to a Yamaha CXA5100 Processor (they have been around for over 2 years as well). He still runs 5.1.2, just with the better processing, because it suites his room size and layout and fills it with 3 dimensional sound. Before we put the ceiling speakers in he used to run it 5.1 Atmos which even without ceiling speakers sounded better than Dolby True HD. He's totally happy and I'm impressed that the collection of 7.1.4 movies works perfectly in his set up. Just tell the processor that its 5.1.2 and it directs the objects accordingly. Worth emphasising that he has been enjoying a 4K Atmos AVR for over 2 years and a now has a 4K Atmos Processor, meanwhile we emotivites wait patiently (well maybe not so patiently) for ............... Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by deewan on May 17, 2018 8:23:09 GMT -5
The 100 number is from being here every day, and seeing the same 100 or so people saying the same thing over and over. Sometimes complaining in creative ways (my shipping box is in the corner ready to send out), but mostly saying the same thing, over and over and over and over and over. How do you come up with the 100 member estimate? I would have guessed its MUCH higher. You need to rethink your math.  Honestly though, I stopped reading most of the threads because of the same guys constantly coming on here to complain about something. Its frustrating to see there are 40 news posts about the RMC and 39 of them are complaints about missed deadlines or how the RMC won't include a specific feature that impacts exactly 1 forum member. But it's everyone's right to post what they want. But it stinks because it causes so much noise that it's difficult to find real updates or facts. |
|
|
|
Post by thrillcat on May 17, 2018 8:25:19 GMT -5
The 100 number is from being here every day, and seeing the same 100 or so people saying the same thing over and over. Sometimes complaining in creative ways (my shipping box is in the corner ready to send out), but mostly saying the same thing, over and over and over and over and over. How do you come up with the 100 member estimate? I would have guessed its MUCH higher. You need to rethink your math. Honestly though, I stopped reading most of the threads because of the same guys constantly coming on here to complain about something. You just answered your own question. There are a ton of complaints, but few posters doing the complaining. The same guys...yeah, about 100 of them or so. |
|
|
|
Post by lrobertson on May 17, 2018 15:42:45 GMT -5
Fresh off the trinnov thread.
Question: Prior to getting the Trinnov, my favorite up-mixer for movies (particularly for native DTS films) was DTS:Neural-X. Now, I really prefer DSU since it can make use of more speakers and provide a more cohesive/immersive soundscape.
Anyone else experiencing this?
|
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on May 17, 2018 16:16:24 GMT -5
I like using DSU on DTS material, but I have an older AV-7702 that does not have DTS-X at all. The newer prepros that have both do not allow crossover use of the upmixers.
|
|
|
|
Post by lrobertson on May 17, 2018 16:26:49 GMT -5
Wouldn’t trinnov be in that category? Or is it old enough to have both? I would of thought if that’s the case for all a firmware upgrade for the trinnov would of limited it by now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on May 17, 2018 16:42:02 GMT -5
The same guys...yeah, about 100 of them or so. The marketing gurus used to say that for every 1 customer that complains about something there are 10 that don't, even though they have the same complaints. Similarly with 1 unhappy customer they tell 10 other people about their problems. Based on that logic, if there are 100 complainers, then there are probably 1,000 that aren't complaining and they have in turn told 10,000. Evidence, well on the local Australian audio forums Emotiva was often discussed. by multiple posters, daily, now there would be lucky to be 1 post per month. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on May 17, 2018 16:45:18 GMT -5
Wouldn’t trinnov be in that category? Or is it old enough to have both? I would of thought if that’s the case for all a firmware upgrade for the trinnov would of limited it by now. Trinnov does all of their own coding and uses computer processors in their product. Everyone else is dependent upon pre-programmed DSP chips. Starting at $18,000.00, I don't think anyone here has one! |
|
