|
|
Post by goozoo on Aug 5, 2017 17:30:54 GMT -5
No. I use Schiit Yggdrasil DACS for my 2 channel sources. Analog inputs to pre/pro required and balanced preferred. Digital is all via HDMI. Limiting the channels? Well I currently have a 7.1 setup so no. But I do enjoy 2 channel music there now and then. So your only concern is 2 channel pass through? You don't want the Dirac or for it to hit an ADC and the RMC's DAC to take away from your DAC's? Is it possible the RMC's DAC can produce as good of sound as yours? Just curious. I'll read up on them. I realize if your into 2 channel it's not like you'd want a completely different listening room than your 16 so I get that. Just curious what you think your gaining avoiding the RMC DAC. Am I correct when I say that a good performing DAC doesn't leave a signature or do you prefer one with a warmer sound/coloring or something else? Edit: I did read about your DAC's. I know why you'd want them in the chain. I'd be interested to hear how they differ from the 2 channel RMC DAC when you get that opportunity if you pull the trigger on it. The Schiit DACs sound a bit warmer compared to the AKM that the RMC will be equipped with. This will also be true of the XMC-1 with their Burr Brown DACs being less forward than the AKM. As technology advances, the differences in sound quality become more evident when listening to 2 channel music vs. surround audio. |
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 18,489
|
Post by DYohn on Aug 5, 2017 18:31:55 GMT -5
I have a dedicated 2 channel room. But I also sometimes play 2 channel music with my HT. So I want both. I don't care what the DAC in the pre/pro sounds like for music.
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,489
|
Post by DYohn on Aug 5, 2017 18:35:57 GMT -5
The Schiit DACs sound a bit warmer compared to the AKM that the RMC will be equipped with. This will also be true of the XMC-1 with their Burr Brown DACs being less forward than the AKM. As technology advances, the differences in sound quality become more evident when listening to 2 channel music vs. surround audio. You can't possibly know what the RMC1 sounds like yet. And calling the Yggdrasil warm means to me that you don't really know what it sounds like either.  |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Aug 5, 2017 18:44:03 GMT -5
The Schiit DACs sound a bit warmer compared to the AKM that the RMC will be equipped with. This will also be true of the XMC-1 with their Burr Brown DACs being less forward than the AKM. As technology advances, the differences in sound quality become more evident when listening to 2 channel music vs. surround audio. You can't possibly know what the RMC1 sounds like yet. And calling the Yggdrasil warm means to me that you don't really know what it sounds like either. +1 The implementation can have more effect on the sound than the particular DAC chip chosen. Until we actually hear the finished product we can't possibly pass judgement on what it will actually sound like. Even then its influenced by what's around it. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by lrobertson on Aug 5, 2017 20:11:02 GMT -5
So I'm not planning on doing a system without front wides so that there would probably ruin any 2 channel listening because the 45 angles are really important aren't they? If it weren't for that I wouldn't be apposed to those 2 analog inputs to future proof it just in case.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Aug 5, 2017 20:43:25 GMT -5
Maybe I'm just being melodramatic, but I hate most of the adjectives that get applied to DACs. They just don't have consistent substantial meaning. If the words aren't universally agreed upon, they're worthless.
This DAC sounds..... fruity with earthen tones.
I'm not convinced with surround content you'd have any ability at all to identify what DAC is being used.
|
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Aug 6, 2017 6:26:08 GMT -5
2017 is 12 months long. If it comes out next year it will be right on time for me. Always fun looking at old posts ; a prescient prediction at the time and as touted a lot quicker than the xmc1 its based on Anyone @ emofest ask Dan what he meant here .; "It has some very sweet features we haven't talked about yet!!!" Personally Ime beginning to wonder when this little beauty will be released  If at all  |
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Aug 6, 2017 8:13:18 GMT -5
Please don't derail this discussion with another "it's never going to come out" discussion...
I think we've had enough of those to last a lifetime. We aren't going to learn anything from pessimism.
|
|
hemster
Global Moderator 
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,951
|
Post by hemster on Aug 6, 2017 11:58:41 GMT -5
Please don't derail this discussion with another "it's never going to come out" discussion... Agreed. If one really thinks it's never going to be released, then they should not post here, given that by definition their contribution would be irrelevant. |
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Aug 6, 2017 12:28:01 GMT -5
Please don't derail this discussion with another "it's never going to come out" discussion... I think we've had enough of those to last a lifetime. We aren't going to learn anything from pessimism. No Jim ? ; you misinterpreted me ; I think its quite impressive that the RMC1 has had a short gestation when you consider Emo had to wait for the coding of the sharc chipset to be done by a 3rd party That's why I said Djohn was prescient ; didn't see many others with a nice attitude ; oh well..I remember when the XMC1 came out it was stated future pre pros would be quicker being based on the XMC1 and Emo has forged ahead here imho The 2nd paragraph was a joke based on the following PCM 1 blurb that obviously was a short lived idea unrelated to the RMC1 [ I thought it was clever  ] . Even this thread title is not a glass 1/2 full stance ; mores the pity.. This is what happens when you do paragraphs ; a lot to be said for train of thought posts without paragraphs I spose.. I can see how you interpreted me. |
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Aug 6, 2017 12:33:10 GMT -5
Sorry I misinterpreted you. I don't mean any offense.
The "maybe it's never coming out" discussion is a touchy theme here on the lounge..... :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Aug 6, 2017 12:40:24 GMT -5
Sorry I misinterpreted you. I don't mean any offense. The "maybe it's never coming out" discussion is a touchy theme here on the lounge..... :-) I should proof read a bit more ; easily see how it could come off  |
|
|
|
Post by lrobertson on Aug 10, 2017 20:41:58 GMT -5
I know there is the argument that the new hdr10+ dynamic hdr format should be able to be compatible with HDMI 2.0 if companies chose to perform a firmware update that allows that necessary feature off the 2.1 spec but has it been talked about yet what hdmi they will be using on the RMC? I know it doesn't matter for an oppo player with the two outputs and the 203 may not even support the HDR10+ format anyways but if I were to use a device like nvidia shield once a future iteration supports the format it would be nice to run it all through the RMC.
|
|
|
|
Post by 2muchht on Aug 10, 2017 21:57:31 GMT -5
Hopefully there will be more information on HDR-10+ next month at CEDIA, but based on everything Samsung has said --- well, to be honest they haven't said ANYTHING, one way or another. If I were to guess, it will take either HDMI 2.0b or maybe even 2.1. During meetings held by Samsung last month for "The Hollywood Creative Community" Iasked them what level of HDMI it would take, and they couldn't or wouldn't comment. This even included one of the top engineers from Samsung Korea who helped develop the scheme.
Remember: HDR-10 requires AT LEAST HDMI 2.0a due to the nature of the data stream transmission method. Presuming that they keep the base process, and then upgrade to ST-2094-40 for dynamic metadata, which is what they have done, HDMI 2.0 (non-"a") won't cut it. The unknown is if the way they are sending the metadata info requires over 18Gbps, which is the absolute limit of HDMI 2.0. In fact, add i extra headroom and even with a lower than 18Gbps rate, it still might need 2.1/
Bottom line as of today: "Those who know aren't telling, and those who are telling don't know." That's why I can only show some of the facts and guess, but I will neither "tell" or say I "know".
Remeberm the HDR-10+ capability in the 2017 Samsung sets is for internal streaming apps ONLY. That means that there is no need for HDMI at all as long as there is ARC or other means to get the audio out to your AVR or SSP.
Fun, eh?
|
|
|
|
Post by Axis on Aug 10, 2017 22:21:59 GMT -5
Boy I wish they would put the RMC-1 on Emotiva.com for us to drool over the pictures, details and specs. Seems like a done deal to me. Let's get it on ! |
|
|
|
Post by rhale64 on Aug 10, 2017 23:40:34 GMT -5
Sounds good to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Aug 11, 2017 2:10:08 GMT -5
I know there is the argument that the new hdr10+ dynamic hdr format should be able to be compatible with HDMI 2.0 if companies chose to perform a firmware update that allows that necessary feature off the 2.1 spec but has it been talked about yet what hdmi they will be using on the RMC? It will be using the upgraded hdmi 2.0b board the XMC1 will be getting I hope hdr10+ having a lower bit depth than dolby vision will be compatible ; soon find out hopefully as 2muchht said . |
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Aug 11, 2017 5:01:33 GMT -5
Boy I wish they would put the RMC-1 on Emotiva.com for us to drool over the pictures, details and specs. Seems like a done deal to me. Let's get it on ! I want to say the way they do it now - is they won't typically put it up until shipping. I think that they rarely do preorder for most products as well. I'm just going off podcasts where Cathy talks about a new product and says it'll be up on the site in a few days... I'd love to see all the details though.... hoping that is all shared at Emofest |
|
|
|
Post by lrobertson on Aug 11, 2017 10:08:02 GMT -5
Bottom line as of today: "Those who know aren't telling, and those who are telling don't know." That's why I can only show some of the facts and guess, but I will neither "tell" or say I "know". Remeberm the HDR-10+ capability in the 2017 Samsung sets is for internal streaming apps ONLY. That means that there is no need for HDMI at all as long as there is ARC or other means to get the audio out to your AVR or SSP. Fun, eh? This probably is true. People on other forums have said that Samsung claimed even their 2016 TV's would be capable with an upgrade but again that is most likely hearsay and like you said whether it is over HDMI is the big question. I've heard that Dolby Vision can even be delivered with a 1.4 but that is because they have cleverly embedded theirs in a different fashion. What is intriguing about the HDR10+ is it also includes the HDR10 base layer and it is an open format which should have a fighting chance at becoming a standard. I live in the country where I'm lucky to get 10mbps. Can this HDR material be delivered in a lower resolution and give it a visual bump or is it bundled with 4k? I wouldn't be surprised if I'm forced to have all my HDR sources go over HDMI with UltraHD bluray. I guess we'll probably find out a lot more shortly. I do hope I didn't jump the gun on my Oppo 203 purchase. If they can do a firmware upgrade for HDR10+ that would be great as I still would want to mate the RMC with a new tv. Hopefully soon all the new tv's support both DV and HDR10+ (except for obviously Samsung who seems to have firmly positioned themselves against picking up DV). |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Aug 11, 2017 11:22:50 GMT -5
The biggest problem with trying to understand HDR is that there is a huge gap between the theory and the actual products. For example, in theory HDR has nothing much to do with resolution.... so you COULD have HDR HD video... or even HDR SD video. However, the reality seems to be that everything that actually exists in HDR is 4k; for example, I've never seen an HD HDR TV. (Many industry folks have noted that, especially under about 50", HDR is far more noticeable than 4k, and a few manufacturers have hinted that we may someday see HD HDR sets.) Note..... 1) Dolby Vision is a proprietary version of dynamic HDR. That means that both the source and the player must support it, as well as everything it passes through, and they all require licenses from Dolby. This is the main difference with HDR10+, which is open. In principle, most or all current products that support HDR10 could support HDR10+ with minor if any changes. Also note that Dolby Vision is more of a concept than a specific product...... which is a nice way of saying that what exactly it is depends on who you ask. Once obvious example is the claim that Dolby Vision COULD be done under HDMI 1.4.... even though that would not be at all the same as it's done under 4k. Another is that other more vague claims have been made about Dolby Vision encompassing more than just the HDR picture... but the details are somewhat vague. In theory HDR10+ can do all or most of what Dolby Vision actually does, and do it WITHOUT having to pay Dolby for a license, which kind of makes it the favorite in the long race at this point. Technologically, any device that supports Dolby Vision should be able to easily do HDR10+, but the reverse is not true (at a very minimum you're going to have to pay that pesky licensing fee). Because Dolby Vision costs extra to include, but HDR10+ does not, it seems most likely that you'll see devices that do both, and devices that do only HDR10+, but very few that only do Dolby Vision. Of course Dolby has the inside track in convincing disc makers to include Dolby Vision since they have the inside track on discs in general. (If you're paying to make an Atmos disc, why wouldn't you upgrade your license to include Dolby Vision?) 2) In theory, because they are separate, HDR could be delivered independent of resolution, and a lot of what's involved there is simply a matter of implementation... and the options offered. For example, could you subscribe to Netflix 4k, connect your computer to a non-4k monitor, then tell the Netflix app to down-sample the 4k HDR video to HD, while retaining the HDR part of the setup? There's no theoretical reason why you couldn't down-sample a 4k HDR video stream to 1080p, and still retain the HDR information - certainly not if you're doing all of it inside your own software anyway (HDR is strictly a bit-depth and color-space technology; it has nothing to do with resolution.) 3) The current standard REQUIRES 4k UHD Blu-Ray discs to use the current HDCP copy protection. Regular Blu-Ray HD discs were (and still are) required to use the previous version of HDCP copy protection. Both of those HDCP copy protection standards in turn REQUIRE that the video you play from the disc remain protected by the copy protection on its way through the signal chain... and, at least for now, HDMI is the ONLY transmission method that fulfills the requirement. So, in human terms, you are only allowed to play a 4k UHD Blu-Ray disc, or even a regular HD Blu-Ray disc, via HDMI. There is some fine print that, under some circumstances, allows you to play a lower quality version of the video sans copy protection, but it is limited. We can assume that the same requirement is and will be applied to streaming video (under license agreement with the sources themselves). Of course, if you're running an App on your TV, then the video originates and terminates inside your TV, no video signal is sent anywhere, and the copy protection issue is moot. My GUESS is that we'll find that most devices that do HDR10 will see firmware upgrades to enable them to do HDR10+. It should be relatively trivial to add HDR10+ to any device that does HDR10... which makes it just a slight step-up option on the current standard. The addition should be even more trivial for any device which already supports Dolby Vision. Whether Dolby Vision becomes ubiquitous or fades away will depend strictly on whether equipment vendors think adding that extra logo to their list is worth the licensing fee. (Which means that it will depend on how many people are willing to pay an extra few bucks for a TV that does Dolby Vision - even though they don't need it to play the latest HDR disc they just bought.) Bottom line as of today: "Those who know aren't telling, and those who are telling don't know." That's why I can only show some of the facts and guess, but I will neither "tell" or say I "know". Remeberm the HDR-10+ capability in the 2017 Samsung sets is for internal streaming apps ONLY. That means that there is no need for HDMI at all as long as there is ARC or other means to get the audio out to your AVR or SSP. Fun, eh? This probably is true. People on other forums have said that Samsung claimed even their 2016 TV's would be capable with an upgrade but again that is most likely hearsay and like you said whether it is over HDMI is the big question. I've heard that Dolby Vision can even be delivered with a 1.4 but that is because they have cleverly embedded theirs in a different fashion. What is intriguing about the HDR10+ is it also includes the HDR10 base layer and it is an open format which should have a fighting chance at becoming a standard. I live in the country where I'm lucky to get 10mbps. Can this HDR material be delivered in a lower resolution and give it a visual bump or is it bundled with 4k? I wouldn't be surprised if I'm forced to have all my HDR sources go over HDMI with UltraHD bluray. I guess we'll probably find out a lot more shortly. I do hope I didn't jump the gun on my Oppo 203 purchase. If they can do a firmware upgrade for HDR10+ that would be great as I still would want to mate the RMC with a new tv. Hopefully soon all the new tv's support both DV and HDR10+ (except for obviously Samsung who seems to have firmly positioned themselves against picking up DV). |
|
If at all 
] . Even this thread title is not a glass 1/2 full stance ; mores the pity..
