|
|
Post by spom409 on Nov 16, 2016 9:59:15 GMT -5
Hello
Getting the upgrade itch and looking for some advice.
I currently have 2 systems, one for HT/Music (50/50) and the other for 2 channel listening.
HT set up includes UMC-1 w/XPA 5. For the record, speakers include 2X Emo 8.3 w/ 6.3 Center
2 Chanel setup = USP-1 w/ Peach tree 220 amp and Paradigm Speakers. Includes turntable, CD player and Logitech squeezebox.
I have had the UMC-1 since 2010. It has been pretty much trouble free but I think it is time to take the XMC-1 plunge.
Post Upgrade Question:
Would it make sense to move the UMC into the 2 channel system (FYI- I do have an external Lehman Phone Pre-amp)
or should I keep the UPC-1.
I will probably test both in the 2 channel room eventually but welcome your thoughts. Especially from those of you that may have done some side by side comparisons.
Unfortunately one has to go.. :-(
Thanks!
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Nov 16, 2016 15:02:15 GMT -5
I'm a firm believer in keeping digital processors and other extraneous (not utilised) equipment out of my analogue listening stream. Of course there are digital sources (in separate boxes) but music comes out of them analogue and stays analogue through the pre amp, power amp and speakers to my ears. The XMC-1 is specifically designed for them to coexist in the same box, but my experience with a UMC-1 is that the USP-1 sounded better (my ears, my room, my speakers etc) for playing stereo 2.1 music. Keeping in mind the requirement for DAC and ADC processing for the UMC-1 to achieve bass management. My view is, for a superior stereo music system, keeping the analogue chain as simple as possible gives a superior tesult. If you are considering a 2.1 stereo system then the analogue bass management in the USP-1 is very useful..
Cheers
Gary
|
|
|
|
Post by spom409 on Nov 17, 2016 12:47:51 GMT -5
I'm a firm believer in keeping digital processors and other extraneous (not utilised) equipment out of my analogue listening stream. Of course there are digital sources (in separate boxes) but music comes out of them analogue and stays analogue through the pre amp, power amp and speakers to my ears. The XMC-1 is specifically designed for them to coexist in the same box, but my experience with a UMC-1 is that the USP-1 sounded better (my ears, my room, my speakers etc) for playing stereo 2.1 music. Keeping in mind the requirement for DAC and ADC processing for the UMC-1 to achieve bass management. My view is, for a superior stereo music system, keeping the analogue chain as simple as possible gives a superior tesult. If you are considering a 2.1 stereo system then the analogue bass management in the USP-1 is very useful.. Cheers Gary Good info Gary. Thank You |
|
|
|
Post by creimes on Nov 17, 2016 13:16:17 GMT -5
Would you have any need for the UMC-1 in that setup that the USP-1 can't offer, you could run the USP-1 after the UMC-1 with the HT Bypass if needed and just use the USP-1 when you want analog only usage ? or sell the UMC-1 to gain a bit of cash back.
Chad
|
|
burki
Minor Hero
Posts: 26
|
Post by burki on Nov 18, 2016 16:54:39 GMT -5
I'm using the UMC-1 as a third system in the working room with a stereo setup and a headphone.
But here the UMC-1 only decodes and dowmnixes multichannel stuff and the XDA-1 on the digital out of the UMC-1 is the much better dac than the UMC-1.
So I agree with the other posters, that the UMC-1 is fine for HT, but not really for a stereo music setup.
On the other side the XMC-1 (I'm using ut in the living room) is a really good pre for digital and anslogue sources.
|
|
